Debunking several misconceptions created by Karna fans.

In this post I will be debunking and addressing the 100's of misconceptions created by Karna fans. And I will continue to edit this post in order to add more of the misconceptions to debunk their illogical arguments.
The arguments in this post get better and better and the writing style changes, the way of arguing is the same though, the real fun begins after misconception 18. 
Misconception #1 (Bhima could not even defeat 1 elephant.)
Refute - Yet Bhima was able to kill a whole DIVISION of elephants on the 17th day just by using a mace.
Narrative:

The son of Pandu then, excited with rage, and resembling an infuriated elephant, penetrated into the elephant division (of the Kauravas), like a Makara entering the ocean. Having, with his formidable mace, penetrated into that elephant division, the enraged Bhima, within a very short time, despatched it to Yama's abode. We then beheld those infuriated elephants with spiked plates on their bodies falling on every side, with their riders and standards, like winged mountains. Having destroyed that elephant division, the mighty Bhimasena, once more riding on his car, followed Arjuna at his rear.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08081.htm

Even Karna praised Bhima and said that he is superior to ALL in strength of limbs. If Karna thought so highly of Bhimasena then how can his foolish fans insult and degrade him? Narrative: Sanjaya continued, 'While the ruler of the Madras was saying these words unto the son of Radha, Vrikodara, excited with rage, came upon Karna. Beholding Bhima, that delighter in battle, approaching him in that way, the son of Radha laughingly said unto Shalya these words, "The words that thou, O ruler of the Madras, hast today spoken to me regarding Bhima, O lord, are without doubt all true. This Vrikodara is brave and is a hero full of wrath. He is reckless in protecting his body, and in strength of limbs he is superior to all. While leading a life of concealment in the city of Virata, relying then on the might of his bare arms, for doing what was agreeable to Draupadi, he secretly slew Kichaka with all his relatives. Even he stands today at the head of battle clad in mail and insensate with wrath. He is ready to engage in battle with the Destroyer armed with uplifted mace. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08050.htm This means that according to their hero Karna, Bhima was the strongest man in the world of Mahabharata. Stronger than even Karna himself.
If Bhima was so weak then why couldn't Karna, Duryodhana, Kripacharya, Ashwathamman & Kritavarma stop him from killing Duhshasana right in-front of their eyes during day 17 then? Huh? Bhima challenged ALL of them to stop him but they were all powerless.

Addressing Karna and Suyodhana and Kripa and Drona's son and Kritavarma, he said, "Today I shall slay the wretched Duhshasana. Let all the warriors protect him (if they can)." Having said this, Bhima of exceeding strength and great activity suddenly rushed, from desire of slaying Duhshasana. Like a lion of fierce impetuosity rushing towards a mighty elephant, Vrikodara, that foremost of heroes, rushed towards Duhshasana in that battle and attacked him in the very sight of Suyodhana and Karna. Jumping down from his car, he alighted on the ground, and fixed his eyes steadfastly on his fallen foe. Drawing then his whetted sword of keen edge, and trembling with rage, he placed his foot upon the throat of Duhshasana, and ripping open the breast of his enemy stretched on the ground, quaffed his warm life-blood. Then throwing him down and cutting off, O king, with that sword the head of thy son, Bhima of great intelligence, desirous of accomplishing his vow, again quaffed his enemy's blood little by little, as if for enjoying its taste. Then looking at him with wrathful eyes, he said these words, "I regard the taste of this blood of my enemy to be superior to that of my mother's milk, or honey, or clarified butter, or good wine that is prepared from honey, or excellent water, or milk, or curds, or skimmed milk, or all other kinds of drinks there are on earth that are sweet as ambrosia or nectar." Once more, Bhima of fierce deeds, his heart filled with wrath, beholding Duhshasana dead, laughed softly and said, "What more can I do to thee? Death has rescued thee from my hands." They, O king, that saw Bhimasena, while he filled with joy at having quaffed the blood of his foe, was uttering those words and stalking on the field of battle, fell down in fear.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08083.htm

Misconception #2 (Bhima was defeated by an ordinary elephant during the 12th day of the war.)
Refute - That elephant of Bhagadatta was no ordinary elephant. It was enhanced with the power of Vaishnavastra (Weapon of Lord Vishnu). That's why it was so powerful. That elephant was alone capable of Crushing Karna and Duryodhana. Bhima did pretty well against it, considering the fact that it was powered by the Vaishnava weapon.

Hearing this prayer, I then gave, in days of old, the supreme and infallible Vaishnava weapon to the Earth's son. I said also at that time these words, 'O Earth, let this weapon be infallible for the protection of Naraka. None will be able to slay him. Protected by this weapon, thy son will always, in all the worlds, be invincible and crush all hostile hosts.' Saying, So be it! the intelligent goddess went away, her wishes fulfilled. And Naraka also became invincible and always scorched his foes. It was from Naraka, O Partha, that the ruler of the Pragjyotishas got this weapon of mine. There is none, in all the world, O sire, including even Indra and Rudra, who is unslayable by this weapon. It was for thy sake, therefore, that I baffled it, violating my promise. The great Asura hath now been divested of that supreme weapon. Slay now, O Partha, that invincible foe of thine, viz., Bhagadatta, enemy of the gods, even as I formerly slew for the good of the worlds, the Asura Naraka.' http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07027.htm Over here this section of the Mahabharata clearly states that Bhagdatta had obtained the Vaishnava weapon from Narakasura, and he became invincible because of it.

AFTER the loss of the Vaishnava weapon Bhagadatta was a piece of cake for Arjuna. Narrative: Partha then cut off Bhagadatta's bow and slaying next the warrior that protected his elephant from the flank, began to fight with him as if in sport. Then Bhagadatta hurled at him fourteen lances of sharp points, that were bright as the rays of the sun. Arjuna, however, cut each of those lances into three fragments. Then Indra's son cut open the armour in which that elephant was eased, by means of a thick shower of arrows. The armour thus cut off, fell down on the earth. Exceedingly afflicted with arrows shot by Arjuna, that elephant, deprived of its coat of mail, looked like a prince of mountains destitute of its cloudy robes and with streaks of water running down its breast. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07027.htm 
Those two heroes, viz., Bhagadatta and Dhananjaya, then coursed on the field, the one on his car and the other on his elephant, both of which were equipped according to the rules of science. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07026.htm This quote clearly proves that Bhagadatta's elephant was protected by a special armor.

Misconception #3 (demon Nikumbha defeated Arjuna):
Refute - All lies. The reality is much different.
They're reasoning for declaring this as a defeat of Arjuna is ludicrous.

• Nikumbha makes Arjuna unconsious

Quote:

O the ruler of earth! (janamejaya! vaishampAyana continued) As nikumbha came out of the cave, the son of pR^itha (arjuna) blocked all the ways by shooting arrows using the bow gANDIva. nikumbha, the best among the powerful, as he came out, struck the son of pR^itha (arjuna) on the head, with a terrible mace, full of thorns. nikumbha vanished. The valiant son of pR^itha (arjuna) who was struck on his head by the mace became unconscious. He vomited blood and became unconscious.

Analysis: I can accept this as a defeat of Nikumbha did not choose to run away, the fact remains that Arjuna defeated nikumbha twice. Arjuna was made unconscious just like krishna was made unconsious.

Source: http://mahabharata-resources.org/harivamsa/vishnuparva/hv_2_090.html

• So what? Nikumbha even made Krishna unconscious

Quote:

O lord! (janamejaya! vaishampAyana continued) nikumbha struck kR^iShNa forcefully with the iron bludgeon. kR^iShNa also struck nikumbha forcefully with his mace. Being struck forcefully, both of them became unconscious and leaned to their sides. Seeing that the pANDava-s and yAdavAs are stunned (due to kR^iShNa becoming unconscious) the assembly of sages chanted desiring the benefit of kR^iShNa.

• Arjuna defeated Nikumbha in one minute.

Quote:

The best among the wielders of bow, the son of pR^itha (arjuna), expert in battle by all means, shot groups of arrows at the daitya, nikumbha, using the technique of nAgoShtra (see Note 1). arjuna shot many twelve finger long arrows at the dAnava, nikumbha, in the battle without harming the maiden, O the lord of earth! (janamejaya! vaishampAyana continued) with his art, logic and training. Then nikumbha vanished from there along with the maiden, using the illusory skill of demons. No one knew about this.

Analysis: Nikumbha ran away. He was scared of Arjuna's arrows.

Source: http://mahabharata-resources.org/harivamsa/vishnuparva/hv_2_090.html

• Nikumbha was a roadrunner, he contineud to flee from Arjuna & Krishna

Quote:

O king ! (janamejaya! vaishampAyana continued) The demon nikumbha, oppressed by the sharp arrows shot by kR^iShNa-s (kR^iShNa and arjuna), abandoned the north gokarNa and proceeded in the southern direction.

Analysis: He was running away to south india.

Source: http://mahabharata-resources.org/harivamsa/vishnuparva/hv_2_090.html

Even LORD KRISHNA was knocked out by the arrows of the Samsaptakas.
Narrative:

Then mighty Samsaptakas car-warriors, O king, shot at Arjuna thousands of straight arrows. Covered with those arrows, O monarch, neither Kunti's son Partha, nor Krishna, otherwise called Janardana, nor the steeds, nor the car, could be seen. Then Janardana became deprived of his senses and perspired greatly.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07025.htm 
Do Karna fans consider this as a defeat of Lord Krishna? What about all the times Karna knocked out by his opponents? During the Swaymavar of Draupadi, Arjuna knocked Karna out. Even warriors like Yudishthira knocked Karna out on the 17th day. Do Karna fans consider those defeats of Karna? Even Pradyumna (son of Lord Krishna was knocked out by Nikumbha). The difference is that warriors like Arjuna & Krishna never ran away after being knocked out, they never retreated but Karna did retreat once he got knocked into a coma he would stay their but after regaining consciousness Karna would run away. Read this http://logicastra.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-track-record-of-demon-nikumbha.html

Misconception #4 (Satyaki did adharm by killing Burishravas while he was meditating! And Arjuna did adharm by interfering in the fight of Bhurishravas and Satyaki!)
Refute - So Satyaki was tired and afflicted. Satyaki was UNCONSCIOUS when Bhurishravas was about to kill him!

Narrative:

Amongst friends and foes engaged with one another, how could it be possible that the Satwata warrior was engaged with only one person in battle? Having fought with many and vanquished many mighty car-warriors, Satyaki had been tired. He himself, afflicted with weapons, had become cheerless. Having, under such circumstances, vanquished the mighty car-warrior, Satyaki, and brought him under thy control, thou soughtest to display thy superiority. Thou. hadst desired to cut off, with thy sword, the head of Satyaki in battle. I could not possibly behold with indifference Satyaki reduced to that strait. Thou shouldst rather rebuke thy own self, since thou didst not take care of thyself (when seeking to injure another). Indeed, O hero, how wouldst thou have behaved towards one who is thy dependant?'

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07139.htmThis is all proof of these facts.
What about when Abhimanyu was killed while he was unconscious, unarmed & injured? Was that not unfair as Abhimanyu was lying on the ground unable to get up? Why didn't Bhurishravas or any Kauravas rebel against this killing? 

I ach of those chastisers of foes, struck with the other's mace-ends fell down on the earth, like two uprooted standards erected to the honour of Indra. Then Duhsasana's son, that enhancer of the fame of the Kurus, rising up first, struck Abhimanyu with the mace on the crown of his head, as the latter, was on the point of rising. Stupefied with the violence of that stroke as also with the fatigue he had undergone, that slayer of hostile hosts, viz., the son of Subhadra, fell on the earth, deprived of his senses.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07046.htm
Satyaki isn't the culprit Bhurishravas is. Even Bhurishravas himself knows this.

That I have cut off thy arm while thou, well-armed in battle, wert on the point of slaying (the unarmed) Satyaki, is not all contrary to morality. But what righteous man is there, O sire, that would applaud the slaughter of Abhimanyu, a mere child, without arms, deprived of car, and his armour fallen off?' Thus addressed by Partha, Bhurisravas touched the ground with his left arm the right one (that had been lopped off). The stake-bannered Bhurisravas, O king of dazzling effulgence, HAVING HEARD THOSE WORDS OF PARTHA, REMAINED SILENT, WITH HIS HEAD HANGING DOWN.

http:http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07139.htm
Satyaki & Arjuna simply fulfilled their promises and completed their vows.
Narrative:

Then Pandu's son Dhanajaya, called also Phalguna, incapable of bearing thy sons speaking in that strain, as also of putting up with their words and the words of Bhurisravas, O Bharata, in grief and without an angry heart, and as if for reminding them all, said these words, 'All the kings are acquainted with my great vow, viz., that no one shall succeed in slaying anybody that belongs to our side, as long as the latter is within the range of my shafts. Remembering this, O stake-bannered one, it behoveth thee not to censure me. Without knowing rules of morality, it is not proper for one to censure others.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07139.htm
Narrative:

"Satyaki said, 'Ye sinful Kauravas, wearing the outward garment of righteousness, ye tell me, in words of virtue, that Bhurisravas should not be slain. Where, however, did this righteousness of yours go when ye slew in battle that child, viz., the son of Subhadra, while destitute of arms? I had in a certain fit of haughtiness vowed that he who would, throwing me down alive in battle, strike me with his foot in rage, he would be slain by me even though that foe should adopt the vow of asceticism. Struggling in the encounter, with my arms and eyes hale and sound, ye had yet regarded me as dead. This was an act of folly on our part. Ye bulls among the Kurus, the slaughter of Bhurisravas, accomplished by me, hath been very proper! Partha, however, by cutting off this one's arm with sword in grasp for fulfilling, from his affection for me, his own vow (about protecting all on his side), hath simply robbed me of glory.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07139.htm 

Misconception #5 (Arjuna killed Karna's son Vrishasena from behind while he was fighting Nakula & Bhima!)
Refute - Facepalm......... No you idiots! It's written clearly in the texts of the Mahabharata that Vrishasena was killed in a fair one on one fight with Arjuna. Where is Bhima or Nakula even mentioned over here? Vrishasena & Arjuna were fighting a totally fair one on one archery battle.
Quote 1: 

He who was equal to Karna himself in battle, Karna's son Vrishasena, accomplished in arms, of mighty energy and steady prowess, hath, in the very sight of Karna, been despatched to Yama's abode by Dhananjaya who put forth his prowess remembering the slaughter of his own son Abhimanyu and bearing in mind the vow he had made.

Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08005.htm
Quote 2: The high-souled and diadem-decked Arjuna then, his brow furrowed from wrath with three lines, quickly sped from the van of battle a number of shafts for the destruction of Vrishasena in that encounter. With eyes red in wrath, that hero capable of slaying Yama himself if the latter fought with him, then laughed terribly and said unto Karna and all the other Kaurava heroes headed by Duryodhana and Drona's son, these words, "Today, O Karna, in thy very sight in this battle, I will despatch the fierce Vrishasena unto Yama's abode with my keen arrows! People say that all of you, united together, slew my son, endued with great activity, in my absence, and while he was alone and unsupported on his car. I, however, will slay thy son in the very sight of you all. Let all the Kaurava car-warriors protect him. I will slay the fierce Vrishasena. After that, I will slay thee, O fool, even I, Arjuna, in the midst of battle! Today I will, in battle, slay thee that art the root of this quarrel and that hast become so proud in consequence of Duryodhana's patronage. Putting forth my strength, I will certainly slay thee in this battle, and Bhimasena will slay this Duryodhana, this wretch among men, through whose evil policy this quarrel born of dice hath arisen." Having said these words, Arjuna rubbed the string of his bow and took aim at Vrishasena in that battle, and sped, O king, a number of shafts for the slaughter of Karna's son. The diadem-decked Arjuna then, fearlessly and with great force, pierced Vrishasena with ten shafts in all his vital limbs. With four fierce razor-headed arrows he cut off Vrishasena's bow and two arms and head. Struck with Partha's shafts, the son of Karna, deprived of arms and head, fell down on the earth from his car, like a gigantic shala adorned with flowers falling down from a mountain summit. Beholding his son, thus struck with arrows, fall down from his vehicle, the Suta's son Karna, endued with great activity and scorched with grief on account of the death of his son, quickly proceeded on his car, inspired with wrath, against the car of the diadem-decked Partha. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08085.htm Okay Karna fans don’t be mad over here that we are bringing up facts that Arjuna challenged Karna to save his son but still Arjuna was able to kill Karna’s son right in-front of his eyes. Suryaputra Karna could not do anything to save him deal with it.

Misconception #6 (Karna was FINANCIALLY WEAK BEFORE becoming king of Anga): 
Refute - No that's just some further BS. Here is the debunk. 
Narrative: 
"Meanwhile, the basket floated from the river Aswa to the river Charmanwati, and from the Charmanwati it passed to the Yamuna, and so on to the Ganga. And carried by the waves of the Ganga, the child contained in the basket came to the city of Champa ruled by a person of the Suta tribe."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03306.htm
Here we can read, that the basket containing Karna was received in the city of Champa, which was ruled by a Suta (Related to Adhiratha). So Adhiratha as a suta would wield great power or would at least be a part/member of an upper class/caste family in Angadesh.....
Read the next Page:

"Vaisampayana said, "And it came to pass that at this time a Suta named Adhiratha, who was a friend of Dhritarashtra, came to the river Ganga, accompanied by his wife."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03307.htm
Adhiratha receives Karna, and he has been described as a "Friend of Dhritrashtra", so a friend of a King will obviously not be poor. Adhiratha was also a royal by his caste as exposed before. He was a charioteer only by  profession/employment as he was identified as a charioteer by Bhima. 
But their were charioteers in Mahabharata who were also rulers of countries. Like Krishna he was a charioteer but still a monarch of Dwaraka/Yadavas. Shalya another charioteer but still a king of Madraka. 
And Srutayu another charioteer in Draupadi's Swayamvara:

Valhika, the mighty charioteer Srutayu, Uluka, Kaitava, Chitrangada and Suvangada, the highly intelligent Vatsaraja, the king of Kosala, Sisupala and the powerful Jarasandha, these and many other great kings--all Kshatriyas celebrated throughout the world--have come, O blessed one, for thee.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01189.htm
This proves that charioteers can also be Kshatriyas.
Karna's offers to Brahmanas:

"Though cursed, Karna still sought to gratify that foremost of Brahmanas by offering him kine and wealth and gems."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a002.htm
Here Karna offers cows, wealth and gems to the Brahmin whose cow he killed, if he was poor how would he manage to get so much wealth and gems??? Was Karna a thief? Maybe but he would still be financially strong and well off. 
In the book of Karna (Karna Parva) he tells these are the things that were offered to the Brahmana by Karna. 

From these words of the brahmana I am experiencing great fear. These kings of the Lunar race that are lords of (other people's) weal and woe, offered to give that brahmana a 1,000 kine and 600 bovine bulls. With even such a gift, O Shalya, the brahmana would not be gratified, O ruler of the Madras. I was then for giving him seven hundred elephants of large tusks and many hundred of slaves male and female. That foremost of brahmana would not still be gratified. Collecting next full 14,000 kine, each black in hue and having a white calf I was still unable to obtain the grace of that best of brahmana. A wealthy mansion full of every object of desire, in fact, whatever wealth I had, I wished to give him with due worship, but he refused to accept the gift.

Karna Parva: Section 42

Misconception #7 (“Parasurama only taught the science of warfare to Brahmins”)
Refute - Nope this is actually another lie. It's commonly shown on TV Serials and on many Karna blogs you can see this but its another bullshit hoax/misconception. This is shown to justify Karna's lying about his caste to Parasurama.
We all know that Parasurama Taught Bhisma who is a Kshatriya, but apart from him. Their were multiple other Kshatriya's & non-Brahmans trained by Parasurama. 
He even taught Rukmi, who was also a Kshatriya and brother-in-law of Krishna. Rukmi was taught, both by Kimpurusha Drona (Druma) as well as Parasurama.
Screenshot

Analysis: Parasurama dwelled in both gandhamadana mountain and mahendra mountain. Also only parasurama had the Vijaya bow so Rukmi had to have gotten it from him.
ANOTHER NON-BRAHMIN SARANGADHWAJA GETTING WEAPONS FROM PARSHURAM-
(Rama is for Parshuram)
Obtaining weapons then from Bhishma and Drona, Rama and Kripa, prince Sarangadhwaja became, in weapons, the equal of Rukmi and Karna and Arjuna and Achyuta.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07023.htm
SO KARNA FANS, NOW THE EXCUSE OF PARSHURAMA TEACHING ONLY BRAHMINS WON'T WORK. DRONA WAS RIGHT IN REJECTING KARNA FOR BRAHMAASTRA, EVEN PARSHURAMA WOULD HAVE REJECTED HIM, HAD HE SPOKEN TRUTH. THAT'S WHY KARNA LIED. KARNA FANS SAY THAT DRONA WAS THE WORST TEACHER, EVEN IF WE AGREE, THEN WHY DID KARNA NEED TO LIE TO PARSHURAMA? PROVES THAT KARNA WAS WRONG AND DRONA/PARSHURAMA WERE RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Misconceptioin #8 (Karna's Kavacha & Kundala can't be penetrated by even Lord Shiva & Lord Krishna!): 

Refute - No just no. Karna's Kavacha Kundala has been penetrated through countless times. Karna has been defeated despite wearing those armor and earrings.
Narrative:

"Then the illustrious Arjuna beholding Karna, the son of Vikartana (Surya), advancing towards him, drew his tough bow and pieced him with his sharp arrows. And the impetus of those whetted arrows furnished with fierce energy made Radheya (Karna) faint."

Analysis: Now here we see that Karna basically got knocked out by the arrows of Arjuna during the swayamvar of Draupadi despite having the kavacha kundala. Kavacha Kundal were not something that could save Karna from death!
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01193.htm

This is the 2nd time Karna was wounded before he lost his kavacha kundala. Karna himself accepted it.
Narrative:

Towards the small hours of the morning Karna, approaching him, said, 'Fortunate it is, O son of Gandhari, that thou art alive! Fortunate it is, that we have once more met! By good luck it is that thou hast vanquished the Gandharvas capable of assuming any form at will. And, O son of the Kuru race, it is by good luck alone, that I am enabled to see thy brothers mighty warriors all--come off victorious from that encounter, having subjugated their foes! As regards myself, assailed by all the Gandharvas, I fled before thy eyes, unable to rally our flying host. Assailed by the foe with all his might, my body mangled with their arrows, I sought safety in flight. This however, O Bharata, seemed to me to be a great marvel that I behold you all come safe and sound in body, with your wives, troops, and vehicles, out of that super-human encounter.

Analysis: Now over here we see that karna after admitting that he ran away from the battlefield and was badly wounded & mangled by the gandharvas despite having kavacha kundala and is relieved to see that duryodhana is still in one peace. So if a lower set of gods like the Gandharvas could mangle Karna's body despite that Kavacha Kundala, if a demi-god like Arjuna could do it as well. Then why are you foolish Karna fans saying that not even Lord Vishnu & Lord Shiva can do it? That's just a d u m b a s s claim.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03245.htm
And lastly even the celestial dart of INDRA was able to cut through the armor of Karna.
Quote:

Vaisampayana continued, "Thereupon, O king, taking the blazing dart, Karna began to peel off his natural mail. And beholding Karna cutting his own body, the entire host of celestials and men and Danavas set up a leonine roar. And Karna betrayed no contortions of face while peeling his mail. And beholding that hero among men thus cutting his body with an weapon, smiling ever and anon, celestial kettle-drums began to be played upon and celestial flowers began to be showered on him. And Karna cutting off the excellent mail from his person, gave it to Vasava, still dripping.

Link: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03308.htm
Also ACCORDING TO BORI it was the not the celestial dart of indra but a ORDINARY SWORD/BLADE that cut karna's armor.

Quote:

He grasped his sharp sword and began to cut up his entire body. On seeing Karna cut up his own body, the gods, humans, danavas and masses of siddhas began to roar, because despite the pain, there were no distortions on his face. Celestial drums were sounded and divine flowers were showered down from above, at the sight of Karna, the brave man, smiling repeatedly as he cut up his own body with the sword. Having sliced off the divine armour from his body, while it was still wet, he gave it to Vasava.

Analysis: According to bori he used a sword instead of the vasavi dart. So the kavacha kundala would break upon contact with a ORDINARY SWORD/BLADE.

Source: Vana Parva Section 294

Misconception #9 (During days 11-14 Karna had to fight every battle under Lord Krishna's illusions. Only till the death of Ghatotkaca did it stop): 
Refute - Stop just stop. Enough is enough. 

Lord Krishna had only stupefied Karna in order to stop him from using the dart of Lord Indra. He never ever weakened Karna's battle prowess.

Narrative: Karna having assented to this, saying 'So be it' (the desire of) slaughtering the wielder of Gandiva, O bull amongst the Sinis, was ever present in Karna's heart. I, however, O foremost of warriors, always used to stupefy the son of Radha. It was for this that he did not hurl the dart at Pandu's son, owning white steeds. As long as I could not baffle that means of Phalguna's death, I had neither sleep, nor joy in my heart, O foremost of warriors! Beholding that dart, therefore, rendered futile through Ghatotkacha, O bull amongst the Sinis, I regarded Dhananjaya today to have been rescued from within the jaws of Death. I do not regard my sire, my mother, yourselves, my brothers, ay, my very life, so worthy of protection as Vibhatsu in battle. If there be anything more precious than the sovereignty of the three worlds, I do not, O Satwata, desire (to enjoy) it without Pritha's son, Dhananjaya (to share it with me). Beholding Dhananjaya, therefore, like one returned from the dead, these transports of delight, O Yuyudhana, have been mine. It was for this that I had despatched the Rakshasa unto Karna for battle. None else was capable of withstanding, in the night, Karna in battle.' http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07179.htm 
Lord Krishna NEVER weakened Karna's battle prowess Karna was in perfect shape and physique during the battles of Drona Parva. He just got exposed by multiple enemies multiple times. So Karna fans need every excuse they can make up in order to damage control his tarnished image.

Misconception #10 (Karna & Guru Drona also had the Pashupatastra.)
Refute - WRONG Lord Shiva himself says that no one besides himself & Arjuna have this weapon so Karna and Guru Drona can't have this weapon.
Narrative: “Neither the chief himself of the gods, nor Yama, nor the king of the Yakshas, nor Varuna, nor Vayu, knoweth it. How could men know anything of it?” http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03040.htm
WHAT KARNA HAD TO SAY ABOUT THE PASHUPATAASTRA - “he gratified Mahadeva himself in fair fight, and obtained from him the terrible and mighty weapon Pasupata that is capable of destroying the three worlds.” http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08079.htm
SO EVEN KARNA ACCEPTED THE FACT THAT PASHUPATAASTRA WAS CAPABLE OF DESTROYING THE THREE WORLDS. Do you Karna fans really believe that if Karna had such a weapon then he would use it and risk destroying all of the universe with it? The weapons that Drona & Karna used on Arjuna were easily baffled by him. Just name alone isn't enough. Lord Shiva said that only himself and Arjuna have this weapon. If Karna & Drona had the Pashupataastra then Arjuna would not have been able to baffle them so easily. 
EVEN KARNA ACCEPTED THAT THE PASUPATA COULD NOT BE ATTAINED BY HIM. Superhuman was the battle that he fought with the high-souled (Mahadeva) of three eyes. From him he obtained a boon that is unattainable by persons of unsanctified souls. Drona Parva: Dronabhisheka Parva: Section III
Some Karna fan's try to use a quote by Krishna from the 17th day as proof for Karna having Pasupata
But why would Karna use Pasupata on Yudhishthira? Does it make any sense?
Krishna's statement - Yonder Karna urges forward the mighty car-warriors of the Dhartarashtras towards the son of Pritha with the weapons called Sthunakarna, Indrasjaha and Pasupata, and with clubs and other weapons. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08060.htm
These weapons were actually Arjuna's as they are EXACTLY THE SAME - Single-handed I can despatch, with arrowy showers, all warlike kings, to the regions of death. As a blazing fire consumeth a forest in the hot season, so, exhibiting diverse courses, I will hurl those great weapons called Sthur-karna, Pasupata, and Brahma, and all those that Sakra gave me, all of which are endued with fierce impetuosity. And with their aid, setting my heart on the destruction of those monarchs, I will leave no remnant of those that come to the field of battle. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05048.htm
EVEN KARNA MENTIONED THAT ONLY ARJUNA HAD THESE WEAPONS - The weapons called Aindra, Pasupata, Brahma, and Sthunakarna, applied by Arjuna, will, O Madhava, be the mantras (of that sacrifice). http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05141.htm

More elaboration on the Pasupata claims can be found over here, if you are interested in it more. http://logicastra.blogspot.com/2018/09/pasupatastra-parva.html

Misconception #11 (Karna was never called the name "Karna" pre Kavacha Kundala daan and he gained the name Karna through his kavacha kundala daan.): 
Refute - WRONG Karna gained the name "Vaikartana" (peeler of his own skin) when he donated his Kavacha Kudnala not "Karna. Karna was called "Karna" many times before the "kundala-harana Parva of Vana Parva"!

Duryodhana to Bhima:

Can a she-deer bring forth a tiger (like Karna), of the splendour of the Sun, and endued with every auspicious mark, and born also with a natural mail and ear-rings? This prince among men deserveth the sovereignty of the world, not of Anga only, in consequence of the might of his arm and my swearing to obey him in everything. If there be anybody here to whom all that I have done unto Karna hath become intolerable, let him ascend his chariot and bend his bow with the help of his feet.' "Vaisampayana continued, 'Then there arose a confused murmur amongst the spectators approving of Duryodhana's speech. The sun, however, went down, but prince Duryodhana taking Karna's hand led him out of the arena lighted with countless lamps. And, O king, the Pandavas also, accompanied by Drona and Kripa and Bhishma, returned to their abodes. And the people, too, came away, some naming Arjuna, some Karna, and some Duryodhana (as the victor of the day). And Kunti, recognising her son in Karna by the various auspicious marks on his person and beholding him installed in the sovereignty of Anga, was from motherly affection, very pleased. And Duryodhana, O monarch, having obtained Karna (in this way), banished his fears arising out of Arjuna's proficiency in arms. And the heroic Karna, accomplished in arms, began to gratify Duryodhana by sweet speeches,

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01140.htm Seriously even Karna would have shame on the illogical theories of his fanbase.
Misconception #12 (Karna was mild on Bhima during the 14th day, and that is why he lost.): Refute - Hey stupid! Shut up.

Karna was not mild on Bhima, he drawed his bow to the fullest stretch in his attacks on him - "Sanjaya said, 'Then the carless Karna, thus once more completely defeated by Bhima, mounted another car and speedily began to pierce the son of Pandu. Like two huge elephants encountering each other with the points of their tusks, they struck each other with shafts, shot from their bows drawn to the fullest stretch. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07130.htm

Karna strikes Bhima with intention of killing him - Then Karna, desirous of slaying Bhima, shot at him in rage many whetted arrows equipped with wings of gold and polished by the hands of the smith. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07135.htm

Karna drew his bow and let off arrows to the fullest stretch once again - Then Karna, O king, drawing the bow with great force and stretching the string to his very ear, pierced Bhimasena with three arrows. http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08051.htm

These two passages show that Karna’s attacks against Bhima were FAR FROM MILD. Karna attacked Bhima with intention of slaying, kill or be killed. 100 percent. Bhima’s attacks were too fast for Karna to use his celestial weapons though. He was not mild on Bhima, go find some better excuse to save your over-glorified hero runner kutta Karna.

Misconception #13 (Karna's Vasavi dart and Naga weapon would kill Arjuna)

Debunk is below:

According to Bhishma this is what would happen - The shaft that the illustrious and adorable chief of the celestials, the great Indra, gave thee, thou wilt see, will be broken and reduced to ashes when struck by Kesava with his discus. That other shaft of serpentine mouth that shineth (in thy quiver) and is respectfully worshipped by thee with flowery garlands, will, O Karna, when struck by the son of Pandu with his shafts, perish with thee. O Karna, the slayer of Vana and Bhumi's son (Naraka), Vasudeva himself, who hath, in the thickest of battle, slain foes equal and even superior to thee, protecteth the diadem-decked Arjuna'. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05062.htm
The same day the other shaft was used on day 17 Karna also died so Bhishma was correct.

I'm pretty Bhishma would know more than the rest of us.
MISCONCEPTION #14 (Kshatriya's were not allowed to kill Brahmana's in battle, so all warriors including Karna fought mildly) -
Dhrishtadyumna says that Brahmana's can be killed - Thou shalt not escape from me with life. That, Brahmana who, abandoning the practices of a Brahmana, devoteth himself to the practices of a Kshatriya, becomes slayable by all Kshatriyas even as thou, p. 369 [paragraph continues] O lowest of men.' http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07156.htm - (Chapter linK)
Before the fight (in the Draupadi Swayamvara) all monarchs including Karna accepted that it was okay to kill the brahmins - Then those monarchs eager for the fight fiercely exclaimed, 'The slaughter in battle of one desiring to fight is permitted.' And saying this, the monarchs suddenly rushed against the Brahmanas. And Karna endued with great energy rushed against Jishnu for fight. And Salya the mighty king of Madra rushed against Bhima like an elephant rushing against another for the sake of a she-elephant in heat; while Duryodhana and others engaged with the Brahmanas, skirmished with them lightly and carelessly. Then the illustrious Arjuna beholding Karna, the son of Vikartana (Surya), advancing towards him, drew his tough bow and pieced him with his sharp arrows. And the impetus of those whetted arrows furnished with fierce energy made Radheya (Karna) faint. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01193.htm - (Chapter linK)

• It is not Arjuna's fault that Parshuram did not train Karna to react fast enough against arrows. Karna attacked first, stop trying to say that Arjuna attacked Karna when Karna was not prepared.

MISCONCEPTION #15 (Karna defeated all five pandavas on the 17th day)

QUOTE PROVIDED BY KARNIANS (followers of karna) - 

"Sanjaya said, 'Then the Kurus and the Srinjayas once more fearlessly encountered each other in battle, the PARTHAS BEING HEADED BY YUDHISTIRA, and ourselves headed by the Suta's son. Then commenced a terrible battle, making the hair to stand on end, between Karna and the Pandavas, that increased the population of Yama's kingdom. After that furious battle, producing rivers of blood, had commenced, and when a remnant only of the brave samsaptakas, O Bharata, were left unslaughtered, Dhrishtadyumna,O monarch, with all the kings (on the Pandava side) and those mighty car-warriors–THE PANDAVAS THEMSELVES, ALL RUSHED AGAINST KARNA ONLY. Like the mountain receiving a vast body of water, Karna, unaided by anyone, received in that battle all those advancing warriors filled with joy and longing for victory. Those mighty car-warriors encountering Karna, were BEAT OFF and broken like a mass of water, and BEAT BACK on all sides when it encounters a mountain

Refute: Read this answer made on quora - https://www.quora.com/Did-Karna-defeat-all-the-5-Pandavas-in-2-minutes-on-the-17th-day/answer/Maruti-Jai-Walia

Krishna tells us all how the fight was still going on:

"Sanjaya said, 'Meanwhile Krishna, pointing out king Yudhishthira the just, unto Kunti's son Partha, addressed him in these words: "Yonder, O son of Pandu, your brother (Yudhishthira) is being pursued by many mighty and great bowmen amongst the Dhartarashtras, all inspired with the desire of slaughtering him. The mighty Pancalas, difficult of defeat in battle, are proceeding after the high-souled Yudhishthira from desire of rescuing him. Yonder, Duryodhana, O Partha, the king of the whole world, clad in mail and accompanied by a large car force, is pursuing the Pandava king. Impelled by the desire of slaughtering his rival, the mighty Duryodhana, O tiger among men, is pursuing him, accompanied by his brothers, the touch of whose weapons is as fatal as that of poisonous snakes and who are all conversant with every mode of warfare. Those Dhartarashtra elephants and horses and car-warriors and foot-soldiers are advancing to seize Yudhishthira like poor men after a precious gem. Behold, checked by Satyaki and Bhima, they have again been stupefied, like the Daityas, that desired to take away the Amrita, made motionless by Sakra and Agni. The mighty car-warriors (of the Kuru army), however, in consequence of the vastness of their numbers, are again proceeding towards Yudhishthira like a vast quantity of water in the season of rains rushing towards the ocean.

Over here Krishna did not mention a word about Karna. He talks about the group attack on Yudhishthira. If such an incident like Karna beating the five Pandavas simultaneously was their then it would have been given importance. Although it is said the Pancalas tried to rescue Yudhishthira it is written that Bhima and Satyaki checked the Kuru warriors (led by Duryodhana not Karna).

Misconception #16 - Arjuna used impenetrable armor in the Kurukshetra war

____________________________________________________________________

Refute - Let me show you the text of the Kurukshetra war chapters in which Arjuna was pierced and wounded badly, this text will prove that his armor was not even close to impenetrable.

_____________________________________________________________

Susharman pierced Arjuna in the chest - Then Susharma, O king, with a straight arrow, pierced Arjuna in the chest, and then he pierced him with three other shafts. Deeply pierced therewith, and feeling great pain, Arjuna sat down on the terrace of his car. Then all the troops loudly cried out, saying, "Partha is slain." At this the blare of conchs, and the peal of drums, and the sound of diverse musical instruments, and loud leonine shouts, arose there. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08053.htm

___________________________________________________________

Many other warriors were also stated as having impenetrable armor.

Satyaki said Drona was encased in impenetrable armor - The preceptor (Drona), cased as he is in impenetrable mail, in consequence of his lightness of arms, obtaining thee in battle, will sport with thee as a child with a little bird. Drona Parva: Jayadratha-Vadha Parva: Section CX___________________________________________________

Drona was stated as having impenetrable armor too on day 14                                                                                          Yet Satyaki was still able to wound Drona - The grandson of Sini then, O king, pierced Drona with many winged arrows. Indeed, striking him on the right arm, Satyaki, O bull of Bharata's race, afflicted him greatly. Drona Parva: Jayadratha-Vadha Parva: Section CXVI

In reality despite having impenetrable armor Arjuna had never ever used it in the Kuruskhetra war.

Misconception #17 - Karna was not involved in the poisoning of Bhima.
Refute - 
Their are several proofs of Karna’s involvement in this incident. Karna tried to kill Bhima by using poisoned cake prior to this incident.

Here is the quote from Adi Parva - When that terrible poison intended for the destruction of Bhima failed of its effect, Duryodhana. Karna and Sakuni, without giving up their wicked design had recourse to numerous other contrivances for accomplishing the death of the Pandavas. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01130.htm (Chapter Link)

• Clearly Karna was involved in this incident as the text specifically states that he was conspiring with Sakuni & Duryodhana to accomplish the death of the Pandavas.
• Lord Krishna also exposes this incident before Karna dies a dog's death at the hands of Arjuna, see and read here below: 
• When the Kuru king (Duryodhana), acting under thy counsels, treated Bhimasena in that way with the aid of snakes and poisoned food, whither had this virtue of thine then gone? http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08091.htm (Chapter Link)
• During the 12th day of the Kurukshetra war (five days before Karna's pathetic death) he described his fear of Bhima and confessed about the poisoning incident: 
• Recollecting the woes caused them by our attempts at poisoning and burning them, and the woes that arose from the match at dice, bearing in mind also their exile in, the woods, the Pandavas, I think, will not abandon the fight. The mighty-armed Vrikodara of immeasurable energy hath already turned back (for the fight). http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07022.htm (Chapter Link)
• During the 14th night or 15th day (much disputed topic about Ghatotkaca-vadha parva's timeline, what really happened after Jayadratha's death). Karna blamed destiny, fate and time because he kept failing against the Pandavas. Out of such crying Karna shockingly admitted about his deceitful attempts at poisoning Bhima: 
• We have always exerted to injure the Pandavas, relying both on deceit and prowess. Whatever act, O king, a person afflicted by Fate does, is frustrated by Fate, however, much the person himself may strive to achieve it. Whatever, indeed, a man endued with perseverance should do, ought to be done fearlessly. Success depends on Fate! By deceit the sons of Pritha were beguiled as also by the administration of poison, O Bharata! http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07148.htm (Chapter Link) 
• Karna was talking to his best friend Duryodhana. So he was not lying. Sons of Pritha means sons of Kunti (Pritha was another name for her).
• Defenders of Karna this is my message to you, do not argue against the words of your own master your idol your god karna. He himself has just exposed you all by accepting the facts and confessing to his crimes.
  

So Karna was involved in the poisoning of Bhima, it was on Karna's orders that Duryodhana poisoned Bhima, end of discussion!

Misconception #18 Duryodhana's rule was actually really fair and just, his subjects loved him

Refute - No it was not. Duryodhana's rule was a pathetic rule, and he was a horrible economist. The only people who enjoyed his rule were the men of the Brahmana castes. That's why the only people to praise his rule were Brahmanas. Duryodhana himself said that all the kings of the world & India hate the Kuru kingdom and Duryodhana.

Quote:

If, indeed, we stand up against them, our defeat is certain, for all the kings of the earth are under Yudhishthira's command. The people of the realm are all annoyed with us, and all our friends also are angry with us. All the kings of the earth are speaking ill of us, and especially all our friends and relatives.

Source - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05055.htm

Analysis: So under Duryodhana's reign the Kurus were hated.

Refute 2 - 

Also if Duryodhana's rule was just, if he LOVED by the public as these Karna fans continuously state then how come the public always rebuked and censored him whenever the Pandavas left Hastinapore? Karna fans say repeatedly that the citizens of Hastinapore disliked the Pandavas and hated their rule, that is a lie, the citizens actually loved the Pandavas. They wanted the Pandavas as their rulers not the Kauravas.
1st instance (prior to house of lac)
Quote: 

And some amongst the citizens and the country people, who followed the Pandavas, afflicted beyond measure at beholding the sons of Pandu in such distress, began to say aloud, 'King Dhritarashtra of wicked soul seeth no things with the same eye. The Kuru monarch casteth not his eye on virtue. Neither the sinless Yudhishthira, nor Bhima the foremost of mighty men, nor Dhananjaya the (youngest) son of Kunti, will ever be guilty (of the sin of waging a rebellious war). When these will remain quiet, how shall the illustrious son of Madri do anything? Having inherited the kingdom from their father, Dhritarashtra could not bear them. How is that Bhishma who suffers the exile of the Pandavas to that wretched place, sanctions this act of great injustice? Vichitravirya, the son of Santanu, and the royal sage Pandu of Kuru's race both cherished us of old with fatherly care. But now that Pandu that tiger among men, hath ascended to heaven, Dhritarashtra cannot bear with these princes his children. We who do not sanction this exile shall all go, leaving this excellent town and our own homes, where Yudhishthira will go.'

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01148.htm
Analysis: the citizens were afflicted and unhappy at the departure of yudhishthira & the Pandava's.
Karna to Krishna (Book 5 Section 143) - The soldiers of Duryodhana betray hatred for Brahmanas first, and then for their preceptors, and then for all their affectionate servants. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05143.htm

1. Analysis - Duryodhana's best friend, his faithful follower Karna himself said this.
2. According to Karna the soldiers of Duryodhana betrayed hatred for Brahmins, preceptors (teachers), and loving slaves/servants.
3. GREAT RULE? GREAT JUSTICE? I think not.

Conclusion: We can only conclude this fact, that the subjects were not happy with Duryodhana's rule and that they all loved the Pandavas much more than they ever loved Duryodhana. I'm pretty sure that even a child could find out this fact if they actually payed attention to the Mahabharata and read the books. The people of Hastinapore liked Yudhishthira & his Pandava brothers, they hated Duryodhana & his Kaurava brothers. Sad unfortunate truth and reality for the fans of Karna and the Kurus but it is the truth so deal with it.

Misconception #19 - "Karna has a past life as Swedhaja in the Mahabharata."
Refute: Oh ignorant fool. This story is stated in the Padma Purana not the epic of Mahabharata. So stop lying. These same Karna fans that always cry for Barbarika being an interpolated character (from Skanda Purana) are the same people that use the story of Raktaja and Swedhaja. Very sad and pathetic indeed. Anyways if we consider the Puranas as canon then Bhima had defeated Shiva (according to Vayu Purana). 

Sanskrit - 

sa vyAghrarUpI kapilAtmakAmumAM parIxayan.h mAM hantumivA.adravad.h drutam.h | sa me yuddhe vijito mUrchchhitashcha gadAprahArAdAsa liN^gAntarasthaH ||

Translation - 

Shiva in order to test me came in the form of Tiger and pretended to attack cow who was pArvati in disguise. He was defeated in the war by the blow of my mace and fell unconscious and hid in the Linga.

Source - http://www.sumadhwaseva.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Bheemasena-Samonasti-English.pdf This incident most likely happened after the burning of Varanavata's house of lac, during the stay of the Pandavas with the Rakshasa clan of Hidimva.

The Puranas are not canon and they were not written by Vyasa, they are post-vedic texts. Even a Karna fan like Siddarth Reddy said so

Misconception #20 - "Karna came back to fight against the Gandharvas. He came back to help Duryodhana."

Refute: No he did not so stop fricking lying. Read the Vana Parva where Duryodhana comes to karna not vice versa. Karna never went back to rescue Duryodhana, instead it was Arjuna who rescued Duryodhana and Duryodhana left to go back to Hastinapore over their did not find the useless Karna anywhere. Instead he saw had to wait for Karna to come back and talk to him in the morning.

Narrative:

Dismissed by the king Yudhishthira the just, Dhritarashtra's son Suyodhana, bending his head down in shame and afflicted with grief and melancholy, set out slowly. And the king, accompanied by his four kinds of forces, proceeded towards his city, his heart rent in grief and filled with thoughts of his defeat along the way in a region that abounded in grass and water. The king encamped on a delightful piece of ground as pleased him best, with his elephants and cars and cavalry and infantry stationed all around. And as the king Duryodhana was seated on an elevated bedstead endued with the effulgence of fire, himself looking like the moon under an eclipse, towards the small hours of the morning Karna, approaching him, said, 'Fortunate it is, O son of Gandhari, that thou art alive! Fortunate it is, that we have once more met!

Chapter: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03245.htm 

Misconception #21 - "Karna pushed back Arjuna's chariot, despite the fact that Krishna was seated on it, this must mean that he pushed the whole weight of the universe back"

Refute: No. As a matter of fact this incident is not present in any critical edition of Mahabharata. No version contains this incident. It is a folklore, a folktale, a fan-fiction. Told by people who did not like what was actually written in the original Mahabharata. It is not found in any authentic translation. Not in KMG, not in Gita Press, not in BORI, not even in Dakshinatya. So what is the basis for this claim?

Also even so does it make any sense? If Karna's arrows were so powerful that they could push back the wight of the whole universe then why could he could not push the Pandavas out of India? Or ordinary soldiers into outer space?

In the original Mahabharata no Kshatriya, no warrior that participated in Kurukshetra ever made a single attempt to push back a enemy's chariot. So why are you lying by saying that Karna tried to push back Arjuna's chariot?

Also this logic is very flawed and wrong. What about the strength of the horses that pull Arjuna's chariot? What about the strength of Yashoda's lap that held the weight of the universe (Krishna) in her thigh for years? Was that old lady stronger than Karna? Were those horses stronger than karna?

Misconception #22 - "The Mahabharata is the story of the Pandavas and is made to glorify Arjuna"

Refute: If that's the case then why are you debating against me by using quotes from the very same Mahabharata that you consider to be pro-Arjuna and anti-Karna? Besides the Mahabharata is the first, original, and only detailed account of their lives. Karna does not shine in this epic. The Mahabharata may sing the praises of Arjuna but it also points out his flaws and if it was so pro-Arjuna then why would it say that Arjuna was cursed to become a eunuch? Why would it say that Arjuna just simply watched by while his wife was attacked? Why would it say that Arjuna tried to kill his own family members? Why would it say that Arjuna broke his vow of finishing the Kuru army in a single day?

Misconception #23 - "Karna lifted and strung the bow of Draupadi at the Swayamvara Parva"

Refute: Wrong. This incident never ever happened in the original Mahabharata. Karna actually failed to string the bow. Out of all one thousand manuscripts only four manuscripts include a part where Karna strung the bow. But even those four manuscripts include the part where Karna fails to string the bow. So if even the only Mahabharata scripts that contain karna's stringing of that bow also include his failure to string it then the failure has to be true. Classic case of majority wins. Most versions say he failed and even the versions that say he succeeded also say he failed. And let's be honest, what is more likely? Clearly their is no cross reference for Karna's stringing of the bow. Karna always bragged about his prowess but he never talked about how he strung Droupadi's bow. Here is the screenshot proving Karna failed. 

Some very pathetic rebuttals to this screenshot have been that it says Kshatriya Karna, but if you all would use the logic of sage Bhrigu then Karna was a Kshatriya, and he was also a Kshatriya since his mother Kunti was a Kshatriya. Karna also claimed he adopted the ways of the Kshatriya. Mahabharata also describes Karna as head of Kshatriyas in the Swayamvara Parva.
Now their are some people out their that would claim this line to be a clerical error. But the mention of Karna's failure cannot be a clerical error as his failure is described seeral times (we have at-least three references in KMG alone), the only part of the text that it would make sense to be a clerical error is the part that has draupadi reject karna as "suta's son" and has him actually stringing the bow.
Misconception #24 "Karna broke the divine celestial armor of Lord Krishna"
Refute: Hahahahahah nice joke. In actuality Karna's arrows failed to even cause the slightest amount of damage to the mighty Krishna's armor.
The word here is “passing out” of his body, rather than “passing through” or “phasing out”. It just means that the arrows pierced the armour and hit Krishna’s body and fell down. If they passed through, they should have hit the car as Krishna was sitting on it. But they hit Krishna’s armour and fallen to the ground, as explained in the very next sentence:

“Endued with great energy, they entered the earth with great force and having bathed (in the waters of the Bhogavati in the nether region) coursed back towards Karna.” 

This goes to say that it is not Karna’s accomplishment but the accomplishment of the magical snakes of Khandava. Arjuna indeed took down them once he realized what they are. And again, it is explained in the next sentence:

“With ten broad-headed arrows shot with great force, Arjuna cut off each of those five snakes into three fragments whereupon they fell down on the earth.” 

Besides, you can't count that as a victory as Arjuna already pierced Shalya with more than 5 arrows before karna’s hit.
Quote

“Laughing the while, Partha forcibly struck Shalya's armour with ten arrows. Piercing Karna next with a dozen shafts, he struck him once more with seven.”

You will find this in the paragraph above Karna’s attack. This just means that the car drivers were also wearing a good armor that can withstand a few good arrows of our favorite karna.

All of the quotes in this misconception can be found in the eighty-ninth chapter of Karna's book - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08089.htm
UPDATE MAY 7TH 2018!
Misconception #25 "Karna only became deprived of his cart during the fourteenth day against Bhima, he did not actually lose to Bhima"
Refute
I'm sure that the characters of the Mahabharata who had witnesses the encounters of Karna would be more equipped to judging what was a defeat and what was not a defeat than us.
So here are cross references of his defeats at the hands of mighty Bhima.
(1) - Dhritarashra to Sanjaya:

Hearing, however, of the repeated defeat in battle of Karna by Bhimasena of terrible deeds, a swoon seems to come upon me, I think, the Kauravas to be already slain, in consequence of evil policy of p. 284 my son.

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07129.htm
(2) - Father of Duryodhana:

Tell me therefore, O Sanjaya, what Duryodhana said, beholding that Karna defeated and looking like a snake deprived of its poison and flying away from battle.

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07131.htm
(3) - King of Hastinapore

It seems that Suta's son, the mighty p. 288 armed Karna alone, relying on the prowess of his own arms, fought in battle with Bhimasena, disregarding the latter. That son of Pandu who vanquished Karna in battle like Purandara vanquishing an Asura, is capable of being vanquished by anybody in fight.

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07131.htm
(4) - Arjuna himself

By good luck, Karna hath been vanquished in battle with barbed shafts.

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07145.htm
(5) - Dhritarashtra on the seventeenth day:

Beholding, however, that son of Radha now defeated by Bhima in battle, what did my son Duryodhana next do?

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08051.htm Now don't cry saying that it was a different son of Radha lol. This line comes right before that one 'Exceedingly difficult of accomplishment was that feat, O Sanjaya, which was achieved by Bhima who caused the mighty-armed Karna himself to measure his length on the terrace of his car."
Conclusion: Bhima did defeat Karna, not because of chariot-less situations.
Misconception #26 "Karna was not the Dambodbhava demon in his previous life"
Refute
According to Italian Mahabharata (of white people in Europe), Karna was indeed Dambhodbhava in his previous birth.
Original text:

“Arjuna, tu non lo ricordi, ma nella vita precedente noi due eravamo i saggi Nara e Narayana e vivevamo pacificamente sulle pendici himalayane. Un giorno passò nei pressi del nostro eremo il re Dambodbhava; dopo un pò tra di voi nacque uno screzio che vi portò a combattere un feroce duello e, infine, tu lo uccidesti usando il brahmastra. Il tuo nemico di oggi è quel re reincarnato, e puoi ucciderlo ancora usando la stessa arma. Non tardare, fallo al più presto.”

Translation:

"Arjuna, you do not remember, but in the previous life we ​​were the sages Nara and Narayana and we lived peacefully on the Himalayan slopes. One day passed near our hermitage the king Dambodbhava, after a bit among you was born a screzio that there He fought a fierce duel, and finally you killed him using brahmastra Your enemy today is that reincarnated king, and you can kill him again using the same weapon. "Do not delay, do it as soon as possible." By the grace of the Lord, Arjuna clearly remembered all the events of his previous life and the history of his enmity with Dambodbhava. He then redoubled his efforts and pressed Karna hard, putting him in serious difficulty.

Source: http://www.guruji.it/mahabharata/files/karna_parva_125-131.html
Misconception #27 "Karna had the Brahmadanda weapon"
Here is the description of this weapon:

Brahma-danda literally means a Brahmana's rod--bamboo-stick. In consequence of the Brahmana's ascetic power, this thin rod (symbolical of the Brahmana's power of chastisement) is infinitely more powerful than even Indra's bolt.

The only weapons of lord Brahma that Karna possessed were the Brahmastra and the high Brahmastra. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m06/m06120.htm
It is clearly mentioned that this weapon can only be powered by the energy of a Brahmana, and Karna was no Brahmana. And nowhere did Parasurama/Drona/Kripa ever teach Karna such a weapon.

Misconception #28 "Karna defeated Satyaki on the battlefield of Kurukshetra"
Refute
As per Dhritarashtra (a pro Karna character) Satyaki was undefeated:

"Dhritarashtra said, 'Unvanquished by Drona, and Radha's son and Vikarna and Kritavarman, how could the heroic Satyaki, never before checked in battle, having after his promise to Yudhishthira crossed the ocean of the Kaurava troops, being humiliated by the Kuru warrior Bhurisravas and forcibly thrown on the ground?'

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07140.htm This text clearly mentions "the son of Radha" and the only son of Radha that had fought against Satyaki was Karna. So Karna never won against Satyaki, ever!
Misconception #29 "Karna's horse was named Vayujit"

The Mahabharata describes Karna's horses as being killed several times over, repeatedly, none of them had any names:

And that mighty car-warrior, viz., Bhima, deprived the four steeds also of Karna of their lives. The mighty car-warrior Karna then speedily jumping down, O king, from his steedless car, mounted the car of Vrishasena.

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07125.htm

Misconception #30 "Hanuman was a part of the Kurukshetra war"
Refute No he wasn't, whenever the banner of Arjuna's chariot is talked about, only the words "great ape" are mentioned. It is also sometimes called an illusion placed on the chariot.
However we have a few cross references for Hanuman's presence, let's check some of them.
Udyoga Parva:

And at Bhimasena's request, Hanumat, the son of the Wind-god, will also place his own image on it.

This quote means that Hanuman will place a image of himself, a piece of artwork on the chariot flag, so it will not be Hanuman on their, just a image of him. www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05056.htm So clearly the truth is that this quote proves Hanuman was never even a participating in the war to begin with. He just placed a image of himself on their.
Also read this post if you want to know about the role of the ape on Arjuna's chariot - https://logicastra.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-ape-on-arjunas-chariot-hanuman-in.html
Another thing this ape was called the creation of Vishwakarman, so was Hanuman created by Vishwakarma? It was also called an illusion, so do you think Hanuman is an illusion that he is not real? And do you also believe that Bhisma could defeat Hanuman? Because that's what he did to the ape in virat war.
Quote:

And Bhishma, endued with great energy, pierced Partha's flag-staff with eight arrows. The arrows reaching the flag-staff of Pandu's son, struck the blazing ape and those creatures also stationed in the banner-top.

Analysis: The ape never fought back, yet you guys claim it was Hanuman.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04063.htm
Misconception #31 "Karna had nothing to do with Abhimanyu's death"
Refute
It is karna who disarmed Abhimanyu, leaving him vulnerable

At last hearing those cruel words of Drona in battle--words that were suited to the hour--Karna cut off Abhimanyu's bow. Made bowless by him in that battle, five great car-warriors then, well-versed in the ways of foul warfare, slew that hero with showers of shafts.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08073.htm
It is Karna who asked Drona to show him a way to kill Abhimanyu

The Karna, the son of Vikartana, said unto Drona, 'Abhimanyu grindeth us all. Tell us the means by which we may slay him.'

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07045.htm
It is Karna who got blamed by Krishna the most on the topic of Abhimanyu's death:

I swear by Truth to thee, O friend, that my limbs are burning at the thought that while the son of Subhadra was thus advancing, consuming the hostile army with his shafts, even on that occasion the wicked-souled Karna was engaged in acts of hostility to that hero, O lord!

Note: Krishna was most angry on Karna, not Duryodhana/Drona/Dussasana's son. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08073.htm
Misconception #32 "Karna did not harass Droupadi in the Dyut-Sabha"
The refute is below
Screenshot from super critical edition of BORI Mahabharata translated by Bibek Debroy

Analysis: If Karna really had the good of Draupadi in his heart then why would he debate against Vikarna? Especially when almost everyone in the assembly, all the spectators were supporting the words of Vikarna and would rescue Droupadi?
Now Karna fans may say that Karna got angry only because the crowds roars had died down and thus he wanted to make them all angrier (by insulting Draupadi even more) so that they would support Vikarna's appeals even more and rescue Droupadi. I will render this argument invalid too. If Karna was trying to continue to instigate the people in the dyuta-sabha to free Draupadi then he has proven that he is a bad friend to Duryodhana as he is trying to take away what Duryodhana has won.
Here is another screenshot from BORI Mahabharata.

Analysis: This means that everything Karna was doing and saying was according to the wishes of Duryodhana, it was all agreeable to Duryodhana. And we all know that Duryodhana does not want the Pandavas/Draupadi to be freed. He also said disrobing Droupadi would be okay, that is clear harassment to make a woman naked in public.
Misconception #33 "Karna defeated Jarasandha easily, while Bhima (on the other hand) took multiple days (aka fourteen [14] days) to defeat the mighty Jarasandha"
Refute
Actually Bhima went easy on jarasandha. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02023.htm
Krishna noticed this and said the following lines to stimulate Bhima, so that Bhima would quickly kill Jarasandha:

And O king, Janardana beholding the monarch tired, addressed Bhima of terrible deeds, and as if to stimulate him said,--'O son of Kunti, a foe that is fatigued cannot be pressed for if pressed at such a time he may even die. Therefore, O son of Kunti, this king should not be oppressed by thee. On the other hand, O bull of the Bharata race, fight with him With thy arms, putting forth as much strength only as thy antagonist hath now left!'

Hearing these words of Krishna, Bhima quickly killed Jarasandha:

Then that slayer of hostile heroes, the son of Pandu, thus addressed by Krishna, understood the plight of Jarasandha and forthwith resolved upon taking his life. And that foremost of all men endued with strength, that prince of the Kuru race, desirous of vanquishing the hitherto unvanquished Jarasandha, mustered all his strength and courage." Vaisampayana said,--"thus addressed, Bhima firmly resolved upon slaying Jarasandha, replied unto Krishna of the Yadu race, saying,--O tiger of the Yadu race, O Krishna, this wretch that yet stayeth before me with sufficient strength and bent upon fight, should not be forgiven by me. Hearing these words of Vrikodara (Bhima), that tiger among men, Krishna, desiring to encourage that hero to accomplish the death of Jarasandha without any delay, answered,--'O Bhima, exhibit today upon Jarasandha the strength thou hast luckily derived, the might thou hast obtained from (thy father), the god Maruta.' Thus addressed by Krishna, Bhima, that slayer of foes, holding up in the air the powerful Jarasandha, began to whirl him on high. And, O bull of the Bharata race, having so whirled him in the air full hundred times, Bhima pressed his knee against Jarasandha's backbone and broke his body in twain. And having killed him thus, the mighty Vrikodara uttered a terrible roar.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02024.htm Therefore Karna’s encounter with Jarasandha does not prove that he can be a match for the mighty Bhima. Nor was Jarasandha even that strong to be honest.
Misconception #34 "Karna dragged Bhima, Ulupi dragged Arjuna, dragging equals defeating the warrior"
Refute -
Arjuna stopped Krishna despite being dragged by him:

That first of all gods devoted in self, Krishna, was excited with rage. And therefore, though thus seized, Vishnu forcibly dragged Jishnu after him, like a tempest bearing away a single tree. The high-souled Partha, however, seizing them with great force his legs as he was proceeding at a quick pace towards Bhishma, succeeded, O king, in stopping him with difficulty at the tenth step.

He still stopped Krishna in the end, as stated in the text above http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m06/m06059.htm

Jarasandha dragged Bhima:

Accomplished in wrestling, the two heroes clasping each other with their arms and each dragging the other unto himself, began to press each other with great violence.

However in the end we all know that it was Bhima who defeated/killed Jarasandha. I mean even Karna's fan-base knows that.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02023.htm Dragging is not defeat!
Misconception #35 "Karna was in inebriated condition/drunken state during the battle with Gandharvas at Dwaitavana"
Refute:
Karna himself was against drinking liquor

Karna to Shalya:

The practices of these people are very censurable. They drink the liquor called Gauda, and eat fried barley with it.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08044.htm
Analysis: Of course some Karna fans will continue to bray saying that Karna was only talking about a specific liquor, and liquor is not wine/alcohol. Which is a weak argument.
Karna's quote:

They that have for their practices the drinking of spirits, the violation of the beds of their preceptors, the destruction of the embryo by procuring miscarriage, and the robbing of other people's wealth, there is no sin that they have not.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08045.htm
1st Analysis - Karna compared the drinking of spirits to abortion, rape and theft.
2nd Analysis: Here is the definition of "Drinking of spirits" it (the quote) will be highlighted in special colored words an alcoholic beverage that is distilled rather than fermented

booze, hard drink, hard liquor, John Barleycorn, liquor, strong drink

alcohol, alcoholic beverage, alcoholic drink, inebriant, intoxicant - a liquor or brewcontaining alcohol as the active agent; "alcohol (or drink) ruined him"

Source: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/spirits
Also the text states Karna was launching perfect showers of arrows.
Narrative -

And seeing the mighty host of the Gandharvas rushing towards him, Radheya checked them by a perfect shower of arrows. And the Suta's son, owing to his extreme lightness of hand, struck hundreds of Gandharvas with Kshurapras and arrows and Bhallas and various weapons made of bones and steel.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03239.htm Please pay close key attention the word "perfect" cause no drunk can fight like that, no drunk person in condition of drunkenness would be able to fight perfectly. Now don't moan saying that Karna was a son of surya so alcohol did not affect him, if that is the case then you should not make an excuse for Karna's defeat and retreat, like saying that he was drunk.
Misconception #36 "Krishna offered Droupadi to karna as a wife"
Refute:
No Krishna did not ever offer Draupadi to Karna. This argument typically comes from a line in a Parva of the Mahabharata called "Udyoga Parva". It is on the basis of a conversation between Karna & krishna called "Karna-Upanivada".
But no one talked about this conversation between Karna and Krishna or Krishna and Karna in Adi Parva either when Sauti/Vaisampayana narrates the Parvas. Even Dhritarashtra (who heard the whole entire conversation - from the mouth of Sanjaya/Krishna) did not say anything about the dialogues between Karna and Krishna. Thus logic would suggest you all to remove this incident from your minds and the Mahabharata.
It is most likely interpolated (a later addition) not present in the original canonical text of Vyasa’s Mahabharata.
Krishna (prior to this instance) had promised Droupadi of revenge against Karna:
Screenshot

Analysis: Clearly the term "their friends" and another term "enemies killed" refers to karna. Krishna promised that those who wronged Draupadi and the Pandavas will pay and be punished with death. The Bharata lineage includes Kunti's family, and Kunti was the biological mother of Karna.
Krishna told Yudhishthira that he scared Karna (most likely by telling him the truth of his origins):

O lord, rebuking all the kings, making a straw of Suyodhana, terrifying Radha's son and repeatedly censuring Suvala's son for the gambling match of Dhritarashtra's sons, and once again endeavouring to disunite all the kings by means of both words and intrigues, I again had recourse to conciliation. For the unity of Kuru's race and in view of the special requirements of the business (at hand), I spoke also of gift.

Analysis: Krishna said "all" kings so that would include Karna (the king of Anga) as well. Krishna states very clearly that he wanted to create disunion among the enemy kings. He even claimed that he spoke of giving gifts. But he never said he spoke of such a gift to Karna, what he did say however is that he terrified and scared Karna (Radha's son). He never told Yudhishthira about the truth of Karna's heritage being told to him by Krishna (because they promised each other not to reveal it).
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05150.htm
Karna was already a grandfather (at this point in his life) anyways, and so was Droupadi also a grandmother. So why would these two old people marry each other, when both already life partners? When their children are already married and their grandchildren are already born. So such an offer is completely illogical.
But it makes sense on the side of Karna as he himself was attracted to Droupadi. Proof is in this screenshot (Dristadyumna lists the suitors)

Screenshot 2 (the kama aka love of the suitors for Draupadi)

Analysis: Karna was attracted to Draupadi but she was not attracted to him. Also the text states that the kings in the Swayamvara felt hatred towards their own relatives for Droupadi's sake, so Krishna was smart to use Draupadi as a bargaining chip, because he knew Karna had a weak spot for Droupadi.
She was the wife that most men wanted. Due to to this Kama he (Karna) made a rash decision & choice by giving Kunti the lives of four husbands of Draupadi (all Pandavas barring Arjuna).
Misconception #37 "Arjuna was defeated by his own son Vabruvahana"
Refute
It was just an illusion as confessed by Ulupi herself. Vabruvahana had not defeated Arjuna. No one defeated Arjuna.
Ulupi said the defeat of Arjuna was an illusion [Ulupi to Babruvahanan]:

The daughter of the prince of snakes taking it up, uttered these words that highly gladdened the combatants standing on the field. 'Rise up, O son. Do not grieve. Jishnu has not been vanquished by thee. This hero is incapable of being vanquished by men as also by the deities with Vasava himself at their head. I have exhibited this illusion, deceiving your senses, for the benefit of this foremost of men, viz. , thy illustrious sire. O thou of Kuru's race, desirous of ascertaining the prowess of thyself, his son, this slayer of hostile heroes, O king, came here for battling with thee. It was for that reason, O son, that thou wert urged by me to do battle. O puissant king, O son, do not suspect that thou hast committed any, even the least, fault, by accepting his challenge. He is a Rishi, of a mighty soul, eternal and indestructible. O dear son, Sakra himself is incapable of vanquishing him in battle.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m14/m14080.htm Considering the above narrative, Arjuna's encounter with babruvahan was all an act a show. He wanted to test the skills of one of his last remaining descendants, his last son as Pariksit was his grandson (son of Abhimanyu).

After all Vyasa (the author of Mahabharata) himself said that Arjuna is undefeated.

Thou lookest like one shorn of prosperity. I do not know that thou hast been defeated by anyone. Why then, O chief of Bharata’s race, this exceedingly dejected aspect?

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m16/m16008.htm So Arjuna is undefeated. A battle that is setup as an act by Arjuna and Ulupi is no valid defeat.
Misconception #38 "Karna killed ninety (90) percent of the Gandharva army on Ghosh-Yatra, while Arjuna could only kill 10 (ten) percent"
Refute: Such a stupid claim. It's like comparing copper to gold, like the collection of Raees to Dangal. I will debunk the Karna killed 90 % of the Gandharvas claim by using BORI mahabharata alone.
The reality is that Karna only killed hundreds of Gandharvas, and he did not even do it on his own, he had the help of hundreds of Kourava brothers and a huge/large army.
Screenshot of Karna's performance

After this it says "with a desire to kill Karna, several Gandharvas broke his chariot and he ran away using Vikarna's car" So all the Gandharvas that died at the hands of Karna are shown in the screenshot above. He did not even kill one thousand of them! That is pathetic for a student of Parasurama.
Screenshot of Arjuna's performance

Analysis: Arjuna was able to kill a total of at-least 1 million Gandharvas! Saying that Arjuna used celestial weapons right off the bat is a stupid argument. The Gandharvas tried to break Arjuna's chariot just like they tried to break karna's but over here unlike with Karna they failed against Arjuna.
Difference between Karna's situation and Arjuna's situation:
Arjuna was on the ground, while the Gandharvas were in the skies. Arjuna used celestial weapons but so did the Gandharvas. Karna was on the ground (with a chariot) the Gandharvas were also on the ground (but with no chariot), Karna used normal weapons, the Gandharvas also did use the exact same weapons. Karna had the help of a hundred kourava brothers including Duryodhana, Duhshasana, Vikarna, Durmukha, Durjaya and the uncle Sakuni. Arjuna had the help of only 3 people (Bhima, Nakula, Sahadeva) but did most of the work by himself.
Misconception #39 "Arjuna used the Pasupata-astra to kill Jayadratha on the 14th day of Kurukshetra war"
Refute: Ugh the Karna fans just have no boundaries. Mahabharata clearly states that the weapon Arjuna used to kill Jayadratha/cut his head off was a weapon that originally belonged to Indra.
Quote:

Hearing these words (of Krishna), Dhananjaya, licking the corners of his mouth, quickly shot that arrow which he had taken up for Jayadratha's slaughter, that arrow, viz., whose touch resembled that of Indra's thunder, which was inspired with mantras and converted into a celestial weapon, which was capable of bearing any strain, and which had always been worshipped with incense and garlands. That shaft, sped from Gandiva, coursing swiftly, snatched Jayadratha's head away, like a hawk snatching away a smaller bird from the top of a tree.

Analysis: It is compared to Indra's Vajra (thunderbolt) so it has to be one of his weapons. Nowhere is it compared to Shiva, Rudra and nowhere is it called Pasupata.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07142.htm
Here is the screenshot of the critical edition to prove it

Arjuna was using a arrows that could hold up the weight of Jayadratha's head so it does not fall on the ground. It was never the Pasupata that was used.
Misconception #40 "Arjuna’s Digvijay campaign in the north was not a successful one as he failed against Northern Harivarsa, Guyakhas, Bhagadatta even with his celestial bows and chariots but subjugated them under the name of Rajasuya Yajna only."
Quote used by Karnians for the Guhaka claim:

"the son of Indra (Arjuna) with a collected mind marched at the head of his troops to the country called Harataka, ruled by the Guhakas. Subjugating them by a policy of conciliation,"

Source for the above quote: sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02027.htm
Refute: So what is Arjuna used conciliation (mediating the conflict)? I fail to see your point, mediating a conflict does not mean the enemy is stronger.
Here is Sabha Parva Section 25 from BORI Mahabharata:

The son of the chastiser of Paka used his army and determination to conquer the region known as Hataka, protected by Guhyaka. Having won them over with conciliation, he set his eyes on the supreme Laka Manasa.

Analysis: This clearly says that he used his army to conquer the land protected by the Guhyakas. But also claims he won over them by conciliation.
Overall regarding this incident, perhaps Arjuna did not want to jeopardize human life. This was no defeat of either side, so it is a very irrelevant incident to downgrade Arjuna. Also we should take into account about who the king of the Guhyakas was

As a member of the Kshatriyas caste Arjuna has an ethical responsibility. In his younger days he valued life a lot unlike in the Kurukshetra war where he went on killing sprees everyday slaying thousands.

Quote used by karnians for the Harivarsa claim:

At last the son of the slayer of Paka, arriving in the country of North Harivarsha desired to conquer it. Thereupon certain frontier-guards of huge bodies and endued with great strength and energy, coming to him with gallant hearts, said, 'O son of Pritha, this p. 59 country can be never conquered by thee. If thou seekest thy good, return hence. He that entereth this region, if human, is sure to perish. We have been gratified with thee; O hero, thy conquests have been enough. Nor is anything to be seen here, O Arjuna, that may be conquered by thee. The Northern Kurus live here. There cannot be war here. Even if thou enterest it, thou will not be able to behold anything, for with human eyes nothing can be seen here. If, however thou seekest anything else, O Bharata tell us, O tiger among men, so that we may do thy bidding.

Refute: They conveniently left out this quote "Thus addressed by them, Arjuna smilingly addressing them, said,--'I desire the acquisition of the imperial dignity by Yudhishthira the just, of great intelligence. If your land is shut against human beings, I shall not enter it. Let something be paid unto Yudhishthira by ye as tribute." End quote. Arjuna's main goal was not to conquer kingdoms but to collect tribute, if he can collect the tribute without a fight then why not do it without bloodshed? Even the quote used by Karnians says that Arjuna's conquests/battles have been enough and enough is enough, and they claim that Arjuna had gratified them. So if they were already gratified by Arjuna, then it is their defeat not Arjuna's.
About Bhagadatta:

O thou who hast Kunto for thy mother, as thou art to me, so is Yudhishthira also. I shall do all this. Tell me, what else I may do for thee.

Analysis: It was Bhagadatta who offered peace (indirectly accepting his defeat) not the other way around. He (Bhagadatta) automatically accepted his defeat before the battle even began. Their was no seven day battle, no defeat of Arjuna, no draw, no stalemate, no tie.
Source: sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02025.htm Go to the next section and you still see no fight occur.
Further argument of Karna fans is that they use the cross reference of Bhisma to support their claim that Arjuna could not defeat Bhagadatta.
Quote:

The ruler of Pragjyotisha, the brave Bhagadatta of exceeding prowess, is the foremost of those holding the elephant hook, and is skilled also in fighting from a car. An encounter took place between him and the wielder of Gandiva for days together, O king, each desirous of victory over the other. Then Bhagadatta, O son of Gandhari, who regarded Indra as his friend, made friendship with (Indra's son) the high-souled Pandava.

Source: sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05168.htm
Analysis: Maybe Arjuna could not defeat Bhagadatta, but Bhagadatta also could not defeat Arjuna. And Arjuna was not even at his prime as he had not trained under Shiva, Rudra, Indra, Yama etc yet, this was pre-virata parva Arjuna. And it doesn't say seven days it just says days (meaning more than one). And if both warriors truly desired victory (as per Bhisma) then why did Bhagadatta make friendship with Arjuna? Bhisma has contradicted himself.
Note that BORI Mahabharata (translated by Bibek Debroy) mentions eight days not seven, it also says that Arjuna was mild on Bhagadatta (due to him being a father figure to Arjuna).
According to BORI Arjuna defeated Bhagadatta through his own hard work, screenshot

Over here Bhagadatta himself accepted his defeat at the hands of Arjuna after eight days. It even states that Arjuna was all alone where areas Bhagadatta was with a whole entire army and had several supporting warriors with him. He also said he knew he could not win against Arjuna so under the pretext and excuse of his former friendship with Indra he decided to make peace with Arjuna.
Conclusion - Arjuna's digvijaya campaign was not a unsuccessful one but rather a successful one in which he defeated more opponents than Karna did. Arjuna is called Dhanajaya because he gets the most wealth back after defeating his enemies. In Mahabharata conquests enemies are usually always subjected under the name of sacrifices so it's not different with Arjuna's.
Misconception #41 "Arjuna did not slay seven Aukshounis of the Kuru army on the fourteenth day"
Refute: It is mentioned multiple times with several cross references.
First reference in Drona Parva

Second reference in Karna Parva

Considering the fact that in the beginning of the 14th day it was stated that the Kauravas had eleven aukshauhinis, i can only assume that the Kauravas kept getting extra aksuhauhinis to support them. They had eleven during the first day of Bhishma Parva and then nine at the end of it. Then they got 2 more getting back to 11, then four more aukshounis were killed by the death of Abhimanyu. Then they had four more to get back to their original group of eleven on the fourteenth day.

So throughout the whole entire war, as per my calculations the Kauravas had not eleven but seventeen Aukshauhinis, half of them were slaughtered by Arjuna. Also i don't think Duryodhana was talking about all of his Akshouhinis, he might have had more than eleven at his disposal on the fourteenth day.. So they might have had more than just 17 aukshouhinis too. Regardless Arjuna's killing rate is far better than Karna's. And that is a fact, a clear fact.
As per southern edition:

Sanjaya said एवं स निहतो राजन्पार्थेनामिततेजसा। अक्षौहिणीरष्ट हत्वा जामाता तव सैन्धवः॥ 7-148-3 In this manner,O King! having killed eight akshouhinis, Your son in law Saindhava was slayed by Arjuna Of great splendour.

Misconception #42 "Arjuna killed Karna unfairly"
Refute: Nope, karna was killed very fairly, as i have explained in this post of mine - https://logicastra.blogspot.com/2018/04/karnas-death.html read with all of your heart. Also their is only one reference of anyone in the epic at all stating that Karna was killed through treachery, and that reference comes from Duryodhana in this section http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09061.htm
Here is his quote

"When again the wheel of Karna's car sank in mire and Karna was afflicted with calamity and almost vanquished on that account, when, indeed, that foremost of men became anxious to liberate his wheel, thou causedst that Karna to be then slain!"

Analysis: But during the section previously Duryodhana was already stated to be killed! So how can someone who is already dead comment on the death of Karna?!?
Quote:

"Reflecting on all this, O thou of Vrishni's race, I looked on with indifference! Having slain the covetous Duryodhana bereft of wisdom and enslaved by his passions, let the son of Pandu gratify his desire, be it righteousness or unrighteousness!"

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09060.htm
Analysis So duryodhana's statement is nullified! Karna was killed in a fair fight. His death was compared to an Asura's death at the hands of Indra.
And regardless even if we consider Duryodhana's quote then he stated that Karna almost lost and was already close to defeat.

According to Dhritarashtra vimna partho karna died while he was still on his chariot. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08009.htm

Misconception #43 "Karna fought the entire Mahabharata war halfheartedly"
Refute - Here are a few instances where Karna fought with the intention of killing his opponents.

• Against Bhima
• (14th day)

Quote:

Leaving Radha's son, that foremost of car-warriors Bhimasena, desired to proceed to the place where those two heroes, viz., Krishna and Dhananjaya were. The son of Radha, however, rushing towards him as he proceeded, covered him, O king, with dense showers of arrows, like a cloud pouring, torrents of rain on a mountain.

Analysis: Bhima was leaving Karna alone yet Karna still went after him, he could have easily kept his promise to Kunti and allowed Bhima to pass.

Chapter: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07127.htm

• (14th day)

Quote:

Beholding Adhiratha's son excited with rage, thy sons, O king, regarded Bhimasena to be already poured as a libation on the (Karna) fire.

Analysis:

Clearly written that Karna was enraged and sons of Dhritarashtra believed that Bhima was already dead (sacrificed).

Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07128.htm

• (14th day)

Quote:

And all the combatants, O king, ceased to fight, desirous of beholding the prowess of Karna and of the son of Pandu, each of whom was desirous of slaying the other.

Analysis: Over here it is written clearly that Bhima and Karna were both giving it their all and trying kill each other. No halfheartedness over here.

Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07135.htm

• Against Abhimanyu (13th day)
• Text:

Thus addressed, Karna with rage and desirous of doing good to thy son, rained showers of sharp arrows on the invincible Abhimanyu.

Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07037.htm

• We already know that he asked Drona to tell him how to kill Abhimanyu so no need to explain that.

Misconception #44 "Karna defeated Indra"
Refute:
This fraud tale comes from the legendary bakwas TV serial known as "Suryaputra Karn - सूर्यपुत्र कर्ण" It is not mentioned in any authentic scripts, scriptures, Puranas, texts, Mahabharata translations, better to read some authentic versions like Debroy's translation, KMG's translation etc.
As a matter of fact what to speak of Indra? Karna could not even defeat the attendants of Indra, the Gandharvas (a group of singers):

By the skirts also of the dvaitya lake, O Karna, when thou wert assailed by the Gandharvas, it was thou that, deserting all the Kurus, didst first run away.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08041.htm
Misconception #45 "Parasurama said that no Kshatriya would Karna's equal, so that must mean that Karna is superior to all Kshatriya warriors"
Refute
Parasurama to Karna [Narada talks about Karna's past]:

Go hence, this is no place for a person of such false behaviour as thou! On earth, no Kshatriya will be thy equal in battle.'

Analysis - As he states that no Kshatriya will be Karna’s equal. Now no warrior can be an equal to Karna, everyone will be either superior to Karna or inferior to Karna. After all equality does not mean superiority. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a003.htm
Misconception #46 "Karna was favorite of all ladies."
Refute 
Actually according to BORI CE's text he was the favorite of men not ladies, as Debroy translated the slokha differently then KMG.
Here is the screenshot of the text directly after Karna's death

Here is the KMG translation:

Even such was Vrisha who fell in single combat. All the wealth of that high-souled person had been dedicated to the Brahmanas. There was nothing, not even his life, that he could not give away unto the Brahmanas. He was ever the favourite of ladies, exceedingly liberal, and a mighty car-warrior. Burnt by the weapons of Partha, he attained to the highest end.

But if you are to consider KMG's text then this quote claims that Karna was burned alive to death by Arjuna's astra, nothing about an unarmed death. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08094.htm

Misconception #47 "Sanjaya was a biased reporter, who would enver report the defeats of the Pandavas who had won the war"
Refute
Sanjaya compared the Kourava brothers to be equal to Rama (the son of Dasharatha in Ramayana).

Upon the slaughter of that bull among men, viz., the heroic Valhika, ten of thy sons, each of whom was equal unto Rama, the son of Dasaratha, in prowess, began to afflict Bhima.

He called them equal to Rama in prowess, yet we know that even combined they are not worth one sixth of Rama. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07153.htm

Sanjaya told Dhritarashtra about Yudhishthira fleeing the battle (after his defeat at the hands of Aswathama):

 Meanwhile Yudhishthira, O chief of the Bharatas, in great pain owing to his wounds, retreating about two miles from the battle, rested himself for some time.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08056.htm How can someone who narrated a defeat of the king of the victorious side be biased?
Sanjaya is the same man who made a ignorant biased claim (on the 17th day) that Karna defeated Satyaki:

Meanwhile the mighty Karna, having vanquished Satyaki and desirous of rescuing the (Kuru) king, proceeded straight against the face of Drona's slayer, that warrior of fierce shafts.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08056.htm So i don't think that he was biased towards the Pandava side during his narration of the war. In my personal opinion he was biased against the winners (Pandavas -sons of Pandu).
Misconception #48  - "Satyaki never defeated Karna according to BORI Mahabharata"
Refute:
Here is the screenshot from BORI where Arjuna claims that Satyaki defeated Karna.

I assume that should be enough to end up the pointless debate of whether or not Satyaki truly defeated Karna?

Misconception #49 Karna is more popular than Arjuna.
Refute - Nope, galat galat galat.
Even the actor that played Karna's role "Pankaj Dheer" in the 1980's TV serial "Mahabharata" said that he did not even know who Karna is. He thought that only Arjuna and Krishna's roles are worth playing in the Mahabharata.

Video link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRegyeVD7Tg
Time slot - 46:26 (Pankaj Dheer dislikes the true character of Karna) 46:37 ("other than Arjuna and Krishna no one else is worth my time") 46:32 (He admits that he did not know anything about Karna).
And look at the amount of followers Karna had in comparison to Arjuna's followers.

Arjuna has more followers than Karna. Even if it's by a small amount he has one hundred more. And look at the fans that arjuna has over here - https://www.arjunaishaya.com/book/ they're all foreigners, you never see these people be fans of karna.
Misconception #50 - "Gandhari loved Karna, he was on good terms with her"
Refute: Here are several instances where Gandhari has expressed anti-karna opinions against Karna.

• Gandhari to Duryodhana:

Thou that covetest the wealth of the Pandavas are not a match for them, nor this Suta's son, who is exceedingly wrathful, nor this thy brother Dussasana.

Analysis: Gandhari clearly claims that she considers karna to not be a single match for the mighty Pandavas (including Arjuna).

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05129.htm

• Gandhari to Vyasa:

Through the fault of Duryodhana and of Shakuni the son of Subala, and through the action of Karna and Duhshasana, extermination of the Kurus hath taken place. In this matter the slightest blame cannot attach to Vibhatsu or to Pritha’s son Vrikodara, or to Nakula or Sahadeva, or to Yudhishthira himself.

Analysis: Over here Gandhari clearly blames Karna, saying that it was his actions (karmas) that caused the destruction of the Kurus. And she also accepts that he was involved in many of the evil plots/schemes/conspiracies against the Pandava's. She even said Arjuna should not be blamed for anything.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m11/m11013.htm
And here is what Vimna Partho Karna has to say about Gandhari.

• Karna quotes

1st quote:

"No one should make friends with a Madraka or provoke hostilities with him. In the Madraka land there is no friendship. The Madraka is always the dirt of humanity. Amongst the Madrakas all acts of friendship are lost as purity amongst the Gandharakas and the libations poured in a sacrifice in which the king is himself the sacrificer and priest."

Analysis: He compared the people of Gandhari's kingdom to the Madrakas and said no one should be friends with them, he considered Gandhari impure.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08040.htm

2nd quote:

"They are without the Veda and without knowledge, without sacrifice and without the power to assist at other's sacrifices. They are all fallen and many amongst them have been begotten by Shudras upon other peoples' girls. The gods never accept any gifts from them. The Prasthalas, the Madras, the Gandharas, the Arattas, those called Khasas, the Vasatis, the Sindhus and the Sauviras are almost as blamable in their practices."

Analysis: He called them Sudra (lowest of men/women) and blame-able without knowledge etc.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08044.htm

3rd quote:

The Gandharas, the Madrakas, and the Vahikas of little understanding are even such. Having travelled through the whole world I heard of these practices, destructive of virtue, of these sinful irregularities amongst the Vahikas.

Analysis: Karna believed that the Gandhara tribe was sinful, adharmic adharmis. He considered them of little understanding so what would he think of Gandhari?

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08045.htm

Misconception #51 - "Kripa did not know the lineage of Karna before the Tournament, because he asked him to introduce himself their, and it also proves that none of them knew/even knew karna"
Refute: Wrong again. The reality is that Kripa was asking Karna to introduce himself, in front of everyone over their so that they would all know who Karna is.
Karna also bowed before Kripa first when he entered the Tournament:

Handsome in features, he was possessed of countless accomplishments. The mighty-armed warrior, eyeing all around the arena, bowed indifferently to Drona and Kripa.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01139.htm The fact that he bowed to them without any bias, means that he already knew them and had respect for them both (at-least in that point of time). Also when the text says that Karna was eyeing all, it could mean that he was searching for his old masters/teachers (Drona and Kripa).
Arjuna already knew who karna was as he said his name (Karna) before he was asked to introduce himself:

'That path which the unwelcome intruder and the uninvited talker cometh to, shall be thine, O Karna, for thou shall be slain by me.'

Chapter: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01139.htm
You have to introduce yourself before you engage in a Tournament.
Misconception #52 "Karna never gave bad advice to Duryodhana, in fact he was the true friend and guide of Duryodhana"
During Vana Parva it was Karna who first decided to give Duryodhana the bad advice of attacking blood lusted angry Pandavas, who at this point in time were freshly ready and urging to take revenge as their insult just happened.
Screenshot

Analysis: let us analyze this incident, when karna talked to Duryodhana the first time (here) then Duryodhana turned his face away in disappointment seeming to disapprove of Karna, so then karna thought deeply and started to speak angrily and change his mind by instigating Duryodhana to let out his wrath and kill the Pandavas.
This behavior of Karna is in sync with his purpose in life, that is to create a civil war among Kshatriyas. This is proof that Karna's only purpose was destruction, not friendship, change, upliftment of the lower castes etc.
Karna changed his mind/opinion/behavior/conduct, because at first he gave Duryodhana an easy way out by Duryodhana was disappointed with Karna's behavior before, so in order to please Duryodhana he decided to give Duryodhana bad advice, something that Duryodhana would want to hear, knowing fully well that it is not good for Duryodhana still Karna made this proposal.
Misconception #53 "Subhadra loved Duryodhana and was about to marry him but Arjuna kidnapped her and forcefully married her."
Debunk
WRONG! No such thing has ever been mentioned in the sacred texts. Subhadra and Duryodhana had no connection to each other they never even met each other in the Subhadra-harana/Arjuna-Vanavasa parvas. She was never about to get married to Duryodhan. And regarding her desires about Arjuna, well here is some proof that Subhadra was happy in her marriage to Arjuna - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01062.htm
Narrative:

And during this period, on a certain occasion, Arjuna went to Krishna in Dwaravati. And Vibhatsu (Arjuna) there obtained for a wife the lotus-eyed and sweet-speeched younger sister of Vasudeva, Subhadra by name. And she became united, in gladness, with Arjuna, the son of Pandu, like Sachi with the great Indra, or Sri with Krishna himself.

As you can all read in clear English above their union is described as similar to Sri (Lakshmi) and Krishna, Indra and Sachi, they were a divine couple. It has been written clearly in the Mahabharata that Subhadra was glad with this marriage.
Another thing Subhadra was smiling with great joy and sweetness when Arjuna first touched her.
Quote:

The son of Kunti, afflicted with the shafts of the god of desire, suddenly rushed towards that Yadava girl of faultless features and forcibly took her into his car. Having seized that girl of sweet smiles, that tiger among men proceeded in his car of gold towards his own city (Indraprastha).

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01223.htm
Analysis: Nowhere in any authentic version/translation of the Mahabharata was their any displeasure of Subhadra with her abduction at the hands of Arjuna.
Misconception #54 "the Kauravas and Duryodhana won their war against Drupada too, the Pandavas were not the only ones that won"
These karna fans use a quote from Bori that says all the disciples of Drona went together, but they conveniently missed out this other quote from the same section of BORI Mahabharata.
Quote:

O king! Drona lived in Ahichhatra, which had towns and a countryside, and was won in battle by Partha and handed over to him.

Screenshot:

Source: Adi Parva Section 128
Analysis: karna was also among those who were defeated by Drupad, because karna was a disciple of drona, and the only person that defeated drupad and conquered achichatra was Arjuna not karna, not kauravas, not duryodhana not any of the Pandavas, just Arjuna. "handed over" implies dakshna.
Furthermore: Read the Chaitraratha Parva of Mahabharata, in Gita Press Gorakhpur it says that Brahmanas claimed Drupada defeated Duryodhana and Karna in battle. And in bori it still says right after drupada's defeat, duryodhana is still jealous of Arjuna/Bhima. But you karna fans are misinterpreting this as a victory of Duryodhan against Drupad? Smh.

Misconception #55 "Anjalika arrows/Nalika arrows were forbidden in warfare"

• Warriors besides Arjuna using Nalika/Anjalika arrows
• Ghatotkaca

Quote:

Ghatotkacha again used an anjalika arrow and quickly severed the bow in Karna’s hand, with many large arrows still affixed to it.

Analysis: The use of the word "again" implies that Ghatotkaca had already used this weapon once before either on karna or some other warrior. He use done on Aswathama also during the same night.

Source: Drona Parva Section 150 (Debroy's translation)

• Abhimanyu

Quote:

"While Bharadvaja’s son looked on, the immensely illustrious one shot kshurapras, vatsadantas, vipathas, narachas, half-narachas, bhallas and anjalikas56 and covered that array of chariots. Oppressed by those arrows, those soldiers retreated."

Analysis: The reason i concluded it was Abhimanyu that shot these arrows is because this quote is from the thirteenth day, and Drona could only see Abhimanyu infront of him, subhadra's son. The array of chariots were Rathis of the Kaurava army, the soldiers that retreated were the troops of the kauravas.

Source: Drona Parva Section 37 (Debroy)

Over here Bhisma used Anjalika arrows.

Pandavas used them too.

Here Karna used some of them.

• The use of these arrows was never forbidden, karna fans have no proofs, no evidence at all for their claim/accusation of Arjuna using forbidden arrows.

Another edit September 22nd, 2018
Misconception #56 "Karna defeated Arjuna on the 16th day of the war"

• Proof that it was actually Arjuna who won that day not karna.

Quote:

“Then, Arjuna himself countered Karna’s weapons with his own weapons. He enveloped the directions, the sky and the earth with his showers of arrows. Those arrows descended like clubs and bludgeons. Some were like shataghnis and others were as fierce as the vajra. The soldiers, the foot soldiers, horses, rathas and elephants, were destroyed. They closed their eyes, uttered woes of lamentation and fled distractedly in different directions. In that battle, horses, men and elephants were destroyed. The soldiers were killed by the arrows and terrified, fled.‘ “Thus did they engage in battle, desiring victory. The sun approached Mount Asta.278 O great king! In particular, there was darkness and dust. We could not see anything, favourable orunfavourable. O descendant of the Bharata lineage! The great archers were frightened of fighting in the night. With all their horses, they therefore withdrew.279 O king! When the Kouravas departed at the end of the day, the Parthas were delighted in their minds at having obtained victory and also left for their own camps. They showed contempt for the enemy by sounding many kinds of musical instruments, roaring like lions, dancing and praising Achyuta and Arjuna. When the brave ones and all the soldiers retreated, all the lords of men pronounced benedictions on the Pandaveyas."

Analysis: Over here the term "kouravas" implies the kuru/kaurava army/military. And guess who it was run by? Karna, that's who. This guy was not even a good commander he could not rally his forces they retreated at the end of the day because they were scared of a nocturnal battle. And look at what else the text says. All the lords of men praised the Pandavas, the parthas (sons of pritha aka kunti) were happy ("delighted") that they won the days's war ("at having obtained victory").

Source: Karna Parva Section 21 (translated by Bibek Debroy)

Screenshot of Gita Press Gorakhpur's edition

Later refences from Kmg's translation proving this day to be Arjuna's victory.

Quote:

"Dhritarashtra said, 'It seems that Arjuna slew all of you at his will. Indeed, the Destroyer himself could not escape him in battle, if Arjuna took up arms against Him. Single-handed, Partha ravished Bhadra, and single-handed, he gratified Agni. Single-handed, he subjugated the whole Earth, and made all the kings pay tribute. Single-handed, with his celestial bow he slew the Nivatakavachas. Single-handed, he contended in battle with Mahadeva who stood before him in the guise of a hunter. Single-handed, he protected the Bharatas, and single-handed, he gratified Bhava. Single-handed, were vanquished by him all the kings of the Earth endued with fierce prowess.

Analysis: This is Dhritarashtra's viewpoint, he is pro-kaurava and thus pro karna. He wishes for karna's success but karna never succeeded. All the kings of the earth include karna and yudhishthira. But i know karna fans will only focus on the yudhishthira line in a pathetic attmept to distract from karna's defeat at the hands of Arjuna yet again. Dhritarashtra was obviously talking about kings from the kaurava side not pandava side.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08031.htm

Quote:

Unto them, Karna, sighing like an angry snake, squeezing his hands, and eyeing thy son, said, "Arjuna is always careful, firm, possessed of skill, and endued with intelligence. Again, when the time comes, Vasudeva awakes him (to what should be done). Today, by that sudden shower of weapons we were deceived by him.

Analysis: Karna's own admission should also be considered. Only Arjuna was praised and given attention on day 16, karna was never given any great accolade, cause he had no victories.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08031.htm

Misconception #57 "Karna was abandoned by Kunti"
Refute: No he wasn't abandoned by her at all.

• Reason why Kunti chose to give Karna to someone else

Quote:

‘So as to hide her misconduct and frightened of her relatives, Kunti262 hurled the son, who bore all the auspicious marks, into the water.

Analysis: The reasons are clearly stated that this was all to hide her actions that were out of conduct, and she was scared of her family.

Source: Adi Parva Section 104

• Kunti spied on Karna and watched over him

Quote:

Through a spy, Pritha got to know that he was clad in celestial armour.

Analysis: She still inquired about him and found out what he looked like, so now she can identify him. She  sent spies after him.

Source: Vana Parva Section 293

Another quote:

This, O foremost of kings, was without doubt, the secret known to the Sun, viz., begot by himself on Kunti, Karna was being reared in the race of the Sutas.

Another analysis: She cared for him and made sure that he was in safe hands and that she could know who was raising him.

Another source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03307.htm

• Why Kunti did not reveal the secret of karna's birth to the Pandavas before stri parva

Because at that point in time karna was already allied with Duryodhana, she feared that if she tells the same karna who tried to poison bhima the truth then her sons will follow karna's orders.

Another thing she needed to make sure that her sons formed strong political alliances before karna's secret is revealed. Hidimva with Bhima, Draupadi with Arjuna, etc are examples of such alliances.

Kunti wanted to make sure that if karna tries to kill Arjuna (which he already tried to do many times before the tournament) then Arjuna protects himself, if Arjuna knew it was his older brother then he would hold back (as at this point in time he had not become completely angry at his loved ones).

Karna still tried to kill the Pandavas even after knowing that they were his brothers, he would not spare Arjuna. He even tried to kill Kunti during the house of lac.

So now another question arises, why did Kunti choose to reveal the mystery to karna in udyog parv? The answer is because karna had a meeting with krishna before, karna told krishna that he already knew about his heritage.

Quote:

I know all that thou hast said unto me. Morally, I am the son of Pandu, as also in consequence of the injunctions of the scriptures, as thou, O Krishna, thinkest. My mother, while a maiden, bore me in her womb, O Janardana, through her connection with Surya. And at the command of Surya p. 272 himself, she abandoned me as soon as I was born. Even thus, O Krishna, I came into the world. Morally, therefore, I am the son of Pandu. Kunti, however, abandoned me without thinking of my welfare.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05141.htm He also thought that kunti really did abandon him, so karna's thinking was flawed. But since karna already knew the truth, kunti choose to confront him one last time. they made a deal, four pandavas lives for Arjuna's life/death.

Misconception #58 "Arjuna has no temples without krishna"
Debunk: What a bunch of lies. Arjuna actually does have many temples without Krishna.

(1) Arjuna temple in the coutnry of Indonesia - https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g1137819-d2692391-Reviews-Arjuna_Temple-Dieng_Central_Java_Java.html
(2) Here is a shrine dedicated to Arjuna and Arjuna alone - https://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/history-and-culture/shrine-dedicated-to-arjuna/article3631326.ece
(3), here is a temple of his past life "Nara" - https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-art-history/south-east-se-asia/japan-art/v/ancient-temples-nara and this in Japan.
Misconception #59 "Karna had greater physical strength than Arjuna"
Debunk: Never!
Arjuna has already performed several feats of strength that karna never was able to do.

• Drawing the Gandiva bow

Quote:

He used the strength of his two arms to draw the beautiful bow Gandiva, whose energy was immeasurable.

Analysis: It's that the Gandiva's energy cannot be measured (hence "immeasurable").

Source: Bhishma Parva Section 55 (Debroy's)

• Proof karna could not do the same
• Draupadi's quote

Quote:

Fie on that Gandiva which none else can string save Arjuna and Bhima and thyself, O slayer of Madhu!

Analysis: The proof is right in-front of you... have the courage to accept it.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03012.htm

• Bhisma's quote

Quote:

No man can ever withstand their weapons, clubs or arrows, or string their bows and fix their arrows.

Analysis: withstand's synoym is "bear" meaning no one else besides Arjuna & his brothers could handle his weapons, particularly the bow Gandiva. Karna would not even be able to string it.

Source: Bhishma Parva Section 166 (translated by Debroy)

• Stopping Krishna from moving on the 3rd day

Quote:

However, Partha swiftly descended from his chariot and ran after the foremost of the Yadus. With his thick and long arms, he seized Hari’s large and thick arms. The original god, whose name is the great yogi, was consumed by great wrath. Though he was seized in this way, Vishnu dragged Jishnu after him with great force, like a great storm carries away a tree. But as he was swiftly advancing towards Bhishma, Partha forcibly grasped him by the feet. O king! Thus grasping him with force, Kiriti succeeded in stopping him at the tenth step. When Krishna had stopped, bedecked with a beautiful and golden garland,

Analysis: It takes great muscular strength to be able to stop someone like Krishna from moving any further.

Source: Bhishma Parva Section 55 (Debroy's)

• Stopping Krishna from moving again on the 9th day

Quote:

The mighty-armed Partha ran after Keshava and embraced him in his two arms. But despite being grasped by Partha, the lotus-eyed Purushottama Krishna still proceeded with great force, dragging him along. Partha, the destroyer of enemy heroes, now grasped Hrishikesha’s legs with force and managed to stop him at the tenth step. His393 eyes were full of rage and he was sighing like a serpent.

Analysis: Once again Arjuna stopped Krishna from moving/going any further. And thus saved Bhisma. Arjuna used his upper body strength for this.

Source: Bhishma Parva Section 102

Misconception #60 "Karna fought fairly according to Bhisma"
This is the quote used by karna fans to support their claim:

[Bhishma said to Karna]
In bowmanship, in aiming weapon, in lightness of hand and in strength of weapons, thou art equal to Phalguni himself, or the high-souled Krishna! Thou art devoted to Brahmanas; thou always FIGHTEST FAIRLY! In energy and strength, thou art equal to a child of the celestials and certainly much superior to men.

Analysis: Over here he's (Bhisma's) just stating things to praise karna, if you read the whole entire section then you'll see what else Bhisma has to say, like this "O son of Surya, let these hostilities end with me! Let all the kings of Earth be to-day freed from danger!" since his speech ended with that, as karna refused his proposal we can very easily conclude that Bhisma said these things only to mislead karna, to help him end the war before it causes too much death.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m06/m06124.htm

• and by the way BORI removes this quote, as per BORI bhisma only said karna was truthful not that he fought fairly.
  

Here is another quote of Bhisma, he said that the Easterners were unfair fighters:

The Easterners are skilled in fighting from the backs of elephants and are conversant with all the ways of unfair fight.

Analysis: And karna was a ruler of Anga (the east)...
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a100.htm
Misconception #61 "Yudhishthira did not sleep for thirteen years straight due to fear of karna"
Refute:
If anything then duryodhana could not sleep for his whole entire life because of bhima.
Quote:

That Bhima, relying on whose arms we sleep happily in the night and hope to recover the kingdom of which we have been deprived by the covetous son of Dhritarashtra, that hero of immeasurable energy, remembering whose prowess Duryodhana and Sakuni do not sleep a wink during the whole night.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01165.htm
But let's be real here, Yudhishthira did go to sleep at night time, it is not realistic and it's not true, it's not possible for anyone to not go to sleep for that long and even so let us apply common sense here.
Karna swore to kill Arjuna after the digvijay chapter, then Yudhishthira hears this and gets scared, that's where the story of him not being able to sleep begins/starts from.
But the problem with believing this is that it says 13 years, when Yudhishthira would only have been able to start his "no sleep mode" during the 12th year (when karna did the fakevijay).
Quote:

Dwelling in the woods, O bull of the Bharata race, the high-souled Pandavas spent one and ten years in a miserable plight. And although deserving of happiness, those foremost of men, brooding over their circumstances, passed their days miserably, living on fruits and roots.

Analysis: Since eleven years were over, the twelfth year started. So during the 12th year Yudhishthira would have to stop sleeping. SO if he didn't sleep for 13 years then that means the pandavas went to exile for 25 years (we all know that not true).
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03257.htm this is after the digvijay and ghosh yatra.
Another piece of evidence:

As promised by us, we have spent all the twelve years in lonely forests.

Analysis: This is even before ghosha-yatra, so the pandavas already spent 12 years in the forest, so how would Yudhishthira not sleep for 13 years when karna made the vow after ghosha-yatra?
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03182.htm
Misconception #62 "Karna's vijaya bow is the same bow that Parsurama used to rid the earth of Kshatriyas 21 times"
Response: Lmao no it isn't the bow that Parasurama used to defeat the Kshatriya race many times was given to Rama, not karna. It's not the same bow, proof that bow was given to Rama already.
Quote (Parshuram says this bow was used to destroy the Kshatriya's):

O king, O exalted one, string, if thou canst, with all thy mighty, this bow which in my hands was made the instrument of destroying the Kshatriya race.

Rama uses this bow:

At this, Rama the son of Dasaratha, took in anger from the hands of Rama of Bhrigu's line that celestial bow that had dealt death to the foremost of Kshatriyas. And, O Bharata, the mighty hero smilingly strung that bow without the least exertion, and with its twang loud as the thunder-rattle, affrighted all creatures. And Rama, the son of Dasaratha, then, addressing Rama of Bhrigu's said, 'Here, I have strung this bow. What else, O Brahmana, shall I do for thee?'

Analysis: It's clearly stated that this is the bow used to slay Kshatriya's, Parshuram had multiple bows not jsut one, but this bow is the one only bow that was used against the Kahstriya's. And read the text in this link further, the bow remianed with Rama not Parshurama.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03099.htm
Misconception #63 "Karna had a son named Vrishaketu"
Here is the quote used by karnians:

That large force of the Easterners looking like the fleecy clouds of autumn was (besides) protected by the chief of the Angas (Karna's son Vrishaketu) and Kripa endued with great energy.

Here is the source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m06/m06017.htm
Refute:
Even BORI include's this quote so we should consider it.
But for KMG here are the original sanskrit verses of the passage (before they were translated to English):

स्यन्दनेन महार्हेण केतुना वृषभेण च | प्रकर्षन्निव सेनाग्रं मागधश्च नृपो ययौ ||२७|| तदङ्गपतिना गुप्तं कृपेण च महात्मना | शारदाभ्रचयप्रख्यं प्राच्यानामभवद्बलम् ||२८||

The second verse in particular, is "Angapati" (king of Anga) who can not be Vrishaketu as mentioned by Ganguli. The Eastern forces are protected by King Of Anga and Kripacharya. The king of anga could not have been Vrishaketu because the eldest son of Karna was Vrishasena not Vrishaketu. Not only that, their were other kings of anga.
One king of Anga was killed by Bheema on the 12th day - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07024.htm
Another king of anga was killed by Nakula on the 16th day - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08022.htm
Their is even a anga king who was subjugated by Arjuna and had his kingdom conquered in the Ashwamedha incident - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m14/m14083.htm was this a descendant of karna? Possibly, but their is not much evidence to suggest. But it is clear that karna did not rule all of anga, he spent most of his time with Duryodhan in hastinapur.
Misconception #64 "Pandavas were casteist"
Debunk:
I suggest you to read the conversation between Yudhishthira and Nahusa.

• A few excerpts
• Yudhishthira's views on the qualities a brahmin should possess

Quote:

The serpent asked, “Truthfulness and knowledge of the brahman can be found in all the four varnas. O Yudhishthira! Truthfulness, charity, lack of anger, lack of cruelty, non-violence and compassion can also be found among shudras. O lord of men! You have said that the object of knowledge is beyond happiness and unhappiness. But there is nothing that is free from either. I do not think such a thing exists.” ‘Yudhishthira replied, “If these traits, not even found in a brahmana, are seen in a shudra, he is not a shudra. A brahmana in whom a brahmana’s traits are not found, is a shudra. O serpent! It is said that one in whom these traits are found is a brahmana. O serpent! One in whom these traits are not found, is marked as a shudra.

Analysis: Over here Yudhishthira shows the he believes caste is based on traits, like honesty, charity, non-violence, compassion, and lack of malice. He does not use a birth based caste system.

Source: Vana Parva Section 177

• Yudhishthira's opinions on equality.

Quote:

Yudhishthira replied, “O great serpent! O immensely wise one! I think that among men, birth is difficult to determine, because of mixed birth among all the varnas. Men always beget children on women from all varnas. All men are equal in speech, intercourse, birth and death.

Analysis: As per Yudhishthira birth did not mean caste, birth had no meaning when it came to the qualities of an individual. And this is from bori.

Source: Vana Parva Section 177

Also refer to Sahadeva's identity in the year of incognito.
BORI
Quote:

When he arrived before the king, Sahadeva, the destroyer of enemies, spoke in a voice that was as deep as the clouds. “I am a vaishya by the name of Arishtanemi.

Analysis: He chose to pose as a member of a lower caste, a inferior class instead of a superior one.
Source: Virata Parva Section 9
KMG
Quote:

Having come before the king that afflicter of foes, Sahadeva answered in accents deep as the roar of the cloud, 'I am a Vaisya, Arishtanemi by name. I was employed as a cowherd in the service of those bulls of the Kuru race, the sons of Pandu.

Analysis: He disguised himself as a vaisya. The Pandavas were kind, humble, respectful people.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04010.htm
Misconception #65 "Karna was a selfmade man"
Refute:
So that's why he got the best of educators & teachers?
Education from Kripa

• Bori

Quote:

Having obtained the four kinds of weapons from Drona, Kripa and Rama, he became famous in the world as a great archer.34

Analysis: It is clearly written that he got the four kinds of weapons from Kripa.

Source: Vana Parva Section 293

• Kmg

Quote:

And there Karna put up with Drona, for the purpose of learning arms. And that powerful youth contracted a friendship with Duryodhana. And having acquired all the four kinds of weapons from Drona, Kripa, and Rama, he became famous in the world as a mighty bowman.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03307.htm

Education from Drona

• Kmg

Quote:

The Vrishnis and the Andhakas, and princes from various lands, and the (adopted) son of Radha of the Sutacaste, (Karna), all became pupils of Drona. But of them all, the Suta child Karna, from jealousy, frequently defied Arjuna, and supported by Duryodhana, used to disregard the Pandavas.

Analysis: Karna is mentioned in parenthesis and outside of parenthisis.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01135.htm

• Bori

Quote:

Other princes also came to Drona, supreme among Brahmanas, to learn the use of arms—the Vrishnis, the Andhakas, kings from many countries and Radheya,344 the son of the suta. They made Drona their preceptor. The suta’s son was envious of Partha and always competed with him.

Analysis: Only son of radha that was named "Radheya" is karna. Only son of a suta that envied Arjuna was Karna. He was a disciple of Drona.

Source: Adi Parva Section 122

• Cross reference

Quote:

He was energetic as a child and came to be known as the son of a suta. He went to the best of the Angirasa lineage, your preceptor,9 to learn about the science of war.10

Source: Santi Parva Section 2

• Another reference

Quote:

In due course, when suta Adhiratha saw that his son had grown up, he sent him to the city of Varanasahrya.33 There, he went to Drona to learn about weapons. The brave one became Duryodhana’s friend. Having obtained the four kinds of weapons from Drona, Kripa and Rama, he became famous in the world as a great archer.34

Source: Vana Parva Section 293

Education from Parshuram

• Bori

Quote:

Having obtained the four kinds of weapons from Drona, Kripa and Rama, he became famous in the world as a great archer.34

Source: vana parva section 293

• Kmg

Quote:

The descendant of Bhrigu gave the whole science of weapons unto the high-souled Karna, O tiger among kings with delighted heart. If Karna had any fault, O lord of Earth, the delighter of Bhrigu's race would never have given him his celestial weapons.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08034.htm

Is that why karna was adopted by a tribe that ruled the capital city of Anga?

• Sutas ruled anga in karna's childhood
• Kmg

Quote:

And carried by the waves of the Ganga, the child contained in the basket came to the city of Champa ruled by a person of the Suta tribe.

Analysis: Champa is the capital of anga. Clearly stated to be a city ruled by a suta.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03306.htm

• Bori

Quote:

The waves of the Ganga bore the son and the basket to the city of Champa, the habitation of charioteers.

Analysis: Over here it is said that champa was merely the habitation of charioteers, it's ruler is not stated though. But still if you grow up in a strong community of drivers like that then you are privledged, you are no selfmade man as you get help from others in your community.

Source: Vana Parva Section 292

• Karna got the best of both worlds (Brahims & Kshatriyas)

We all already know how he got Kshatriya friends like Duryodhana, Sakuni, Duhsasana, Shalya, Jarasandha etc.

But he also got several Brahmins teaching him and him donating to some Brahmins.

Also Karna was raised to be half brahmin and half kshatriya as that's what sutas are.

BORI

Quote:

He sought his favours and said, ‘O Bhargava! Know me to be between a brahmana and a kshatriya, born as a suta.23 People on earth speak of me as Radheya Karna.

Analysis: It must be a easy life living as a man of mixed birth, of the two highest castes.

Source: Santi parva Section 3

KMG

Quote:

'O thou of Bhrigu's race, know me for a Suta, a race that has sprung from the intermixture of Brahmanas with Kshatriyas. People call me Karna the son of Radha. O thou of Bhrigu's race, be gratified with my poor self that has acted from the desire of obtaining weapons.

Analysis: Although in reality karna was not a suta he was always considered one for his whole entire life by the general population.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a003.htm

• Krishna's father Vasudeva was a suta.

KMG

Quote:

For, O thou tiger among men, these living, even the bearer himself of the thunderbolt could by no means destroy Suta's son (Vasudeva)!

Analysis: It is also possible that the Vasudeva talked about here is not krishna's father but krishna himself.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03021.htm

• Karna was adopted by nobles, rich people etc, a man that was a friend of dhritarashtra.
• Bori

Quote:

Dhritarashtra had a friend and he was a suta named Adhiratha. At that time, he went to the Jahnavi,31 together with his wife.

Source: Vana Parva Section 293

• Kmg

Quote:

And it came to pass that at this time a Suta named Adhiratha, who was a friend of Dhritarashtra, came to the river Ganga, accompanied by his wife.

Analysis: What a great priveledged existence & childhood that you get to be adopted and raised by the friend of a king.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03307.htm

Sounds like Karna was more privledged and that he was never a selfmade man. IF KARNA WAS A SELFMADE MAN THEN WE ARE ALL SELF MADE MEN/WOMEN/TRANSGENDERS.
Misconception #66 "according to BORI, karna was sinless."
Refute:
According to bori karna himself accepted that he had a sin of GREED.
Quote:

People on earth speak of me as Radheya Karna. O brahmana! O Bhargava! Pardon me. I was greedy for the weapons.

Source: Santi Parva Section 3
Also read this post - http://logicastra.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-evil-sins-of-karna-according-to.html (it has multiple sins of karna that you can't deny, proven from bori ce)
Misconception #67 "Arjuna using celestial weapons shows his desperation, he is compared to shiva but do we ever hear of shiva using such weapons in battle?"
Refute: Yes we do hear of shiva using such weapons we even hear of Karna using such weapons.
Shiva
First quote:

After, O monarch, that best of cars had thus been constructed by the gods, O tiger among men, for grinding their foes, Sankara placed upon it his own celestial weapons.

Second quote:

Then Sarva, having stringed his bow and aimed that shaft with which he had united the Pasupata weapon, waited thinking of the triple city. And O king, as Rudra thus stood, holding his bow, the three cities during that time became united.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08034.htm
Karna:
First incident

Thus assailed on all sides by the foremost of Pandava warriors, Karna invoked into existence the brahmastra and filled all the points of the compass with arrows. The heroic Karna then, like unto a blazing fire having shafts for its scorching flame, careered in battle, burning that forest of Pandavas troops.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08049.htm
Second incident

Bidding the troops stay on the field after having assured them upon his truth and by an oath, the mighty Karna of immeasurable soul fixed on his bow-string the weapon known by the name of Bhargava. From that weapon flowed, O king, millions and millions of keen arrows in that great battle.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08064.htm
Both of these time it was against foot soldiers.
Misconception #68 "karna was a savyasachi just like arjuna........... even nakula & aswathama were savyasachis!"
Quotes used by karnians
Aswathama:

So quickly did Drona's son career in that battle that we could not discern from which side, the left or the right, he shot his arrows, nor could we notice when he took up his arrows and when he let them off.

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08067.htm
Karna:

And while Karna was thus engaged in shooting his arrows right and left, his bow incessantly drawn to a circle, like a terrible circle of fire. The keen pointed arrows, equipped with wings of gold, shot from Karna's bow, covered, O king, all the points of the compass, darkening the very light of the sun.

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07135.htm
Sahadeva:

Do they remember the mighty Sahadeva, the son of Madri, who in Dantakura conquered the Kalingas, shooting arrows by both the left and right hand?

http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05023.htm
Debunk by me:
Aswathama) - This doesn't prove anything. It only says Aswathama shot arrows in different sides not using different hands. Also Yudhishthira himself states that he was only shooting in one direction but he did not know if it was the right direction or the left.
Karna) Over here it is said that karna covered the points of the compass with his arrows not that he used multiple hands. Nothing is stated about which hand karna used, so where do you guys conclude that he is now a savyasachi? Smh.
Sahadeva) This is the only quote that somewhat proves that the character was using both/different hands. But the term Savyasachi means being able to use both hands with equal prowess not just using both hands. Sure Sahadeva could shoot arrows using both hands but nothing is mentioned about him being able to do it with the same proficiency as the other hand.
Here is the meaning of Savyasachi:

And since both of my hands are capable of drawing the Gandiva, I am known as Savyasachin among gods and men.

Analysis: Arjuna states that the maning of savyasachi is being able to draw the Gandiva bow using either hand (one hand is enough but both hands were equally strong). So therefore Sahadeva could never be a savyasachi as he had never done such a thing to the Gandiva bow, same for Karna, Aswathama etc. So karna fans please learn the meaning of savysachi before you get excited.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04044.htm
Misconception #69 "karna did not donate women"
Refute:
According to super critical edition of Bori Mahabharata, Karna offered women with golden necklaces in the name of his business of donation/daan, he used to sell woman, young girls.
Screenshot:

and yet you guys all call him "daanveer"..... this is disgusting.

Misconception #70 "karna overpowered Arjuna in the final battle on the 17th day"
Refute: According to mahabahu Duryodhana (the friend/king of karna), it is Arjuna who won, karna was defeated.
Quote:

In the battle, Karna’s wheel was submerged in the ground. He was defeated and overtaken by a hardship.

Analysis: If the credit of Arjuna defeating Karna on 17th day goes to hardship, then the credit Karna's wins against Bhim, Yudhishthir, Shikandi, Nakula, Sahadeva, Dhrishtadyumna etc should also be given to hardship. Defeat is defeat no matter what happens.
Source: Shalya Parva Section 60
To people that make the faltu excuse of duryodhana not being able to see the final fight the reality is that Duryodhana was a witness to this battle.
Screenshot:

And for gods sake please read some quotes from the battle itself.
1) Arjuna afflicted karna with several arrows and destroyed his armor:

Arjuna drew his bow all the way back up to his ears and struck him with twelve sharp arrows. Those iron arrows were like venomous serpents in their force. He drew his bow all the way back up to his ears and shot them. They were released well. They shattered his supreme and colourful armour, as if they were robbing him of his life. Having drunk Karna’s blood, they penetrated the ground, with the tufts smeared with blood.

2) Arjuna destroyed the crown & kundalas of karna:

Arjuna shot ninety arrows at Karna and each of them was like Yama’s staff. Those arrows severely mangled his body, like a mountain shattered by thunder. The crown on his head was decorated with gems and diamonds and he wore excellent earrings. These were severed by Dhananjaya’s arrows and fell down.

3) Arjuna wounded karna so much that his body was literally dued red with blood, due to arjuna's arrow attack

Arjuna spiritedly shot sharp arrows from the great circle of his bow. He made great efforts and struck with strength. Karna was struck by many supreme arrows and they penetrated his inner organs. Karna was struck by many of Partha’s sharp arrows. He was severely wounded by those arrows that were fierce and forceful. He looked as beautiful as a mountain with red chalk, from which, streams of red water were flowing down the slopes.

4) Arjuna pierced karna and karna was unable to hold his bow anymore:

Once more Arjuna pierced Karna in the centre of the chest with many straight-coursing and strong shafts made entirely of iron and equipped with wings of gold and each resembling the fiery rod of the Destroyer, like the son of Agni piercing the Krauncha mountains. Then the Suta's son, casting aside his bow that resembled the very bow of Sakra, as also his quiver, felt great pain, and stood inactive, stupefied, and reeling, his grasp loosened and himself in great anguish.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08090.htm
5) Arjuna cut off karna's flag:

The supreme one’s standard had the marks of an elephant’s housing. It was decorated with gold, pearls, jewels and diamonds. It had been crafted by excellent artisans over a long period of time. It was expensive and beautiful in form. It always inspired your soldiers and terrified and frightened the enemy. It was renowned in the world and blazed like the sun and the moon. Kiriti used a razor-sharp arrow that was gold-tufted and pointed. With that, he brought down the handsome and blazing standard of the great-souled maharatha, Adhiratha’s son. O venerable one! When that standard was uprooted, fame, dharma, victory and everything that was dear to the hearts of the Kurus also fell down.

All of these are from bori, with the exception of number 4.
Conclusion: Karna failed to get any advantage over Arjuna in this fight. For arjuna the battles that he had with karna were like kicking a puppy, or beating a dead horse. He was defeating someone who was already defeated.
Misconception #71 "Arjuna failed to protect any ladies from the robbers"
Refute: Arjuna still protected millions of ladies, comparing thousands of lost women to millions of rescued women is ridiculous.
Quote (Kmg):

The widows of the other heroes of the Bhoja, the Vrishni, and the Andhaka races, lordless now, that set out with Arjuna, numbered many millions. That foremost of car-warriors, that conqueror of hostile towns, the son of Pritha, escorted this vast procession of Vrishnis, which still abounded with wealth, and which looked like a veritable ocean.

Robbers only got thousands of them (that is less than one percent of the women accompanying arjuna):

Those Mlecchas, however, O Janamejaya, in the very sight of Partha, retreated, taking away with them many foremost ladies of the Vrishnis and Andhakas.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m16/m16007.htm
1 million divided by 1 thousand is 1 thousand. So the robbers took away one tenth of a single percent.
Arjuna still rescued Satyabhama, Rukmini and Jambavati.
Quote (Bori):

Rukmini Gandhari,49 Shaibya Haimavati and the queen Jambavati entered the fire. O king! Satyabhama and the other queens, honoured by Krishna, made up their minds to perform austerities and entered the forest.

Chapter: Mausala Parva Section 8
Queens like Rukmini (the most loved), Satyabhama (the most beautiful) & Jambavati (the eldest) were still alive. They were all queens of krishna and they were protected by Arjuna.
Proof their were a million women with arjuna.

Their were a CRORE (10 million) of women.
Misconception #72 "Bhima used weapons similar to nagastra because he used animals to fight on the 14th day against karna"
Both the incidents are completely different.

• Bhima’s case (14th day)
• Bhima had no chariot
• and no driver
• Bhima was on the ground
• Bhima was weaponless so he was justified in using anything he could find including corpses to defend himself.
• Bhima was using corpses to fight. Animals that were already dead.
• Karnas case (17th day)
• Karna had a chariot
• and a driver
• Karna was still on his chariot
• Karna still had many multiple weapons in his arsenal to defend himself.
• He also had many different options.
• Karna was using real live snakes who had not lost their life yet. Possible that it was not a snake, it was a member of the Naga clan. Naga means naked.

Quote:

Hearing those words, Karna said, "Karna, O snake, never desires to have victory in battle today by relying on another's might."

Analysis: In the end karna himself told the snake that he wants to stop cheating by using another person to fight for him.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08090.htm

Misconception #73 "Krishna called Karna the best warrior"
Refute: Look at some more of Krishna's statements

• What krishna said about karna

Quote (KMG):

The Suta's son Karna, though a fierce warrior, encountering Partha, came to his end on the second day, like an insect encountering a blazing fire.

Analysis: Karna was an insect compared to mighty warriors like Arjuna, Abhimanyu, Satyaki, Bhima, Ghatotkaca, Dhrishtadyumna, Chistrasena, Drupada etc.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m14/m14060.htm
Quote (BORI):

The remaining ones clashed. The suta’s son fought a terrible battle against Partha and clashed against him, like an insect headed towards a fire. He was slain on the second day.

Analysis: Krishna was talking to his father over here. Would he lie to his own father? Their is also no great importance given to the way karna was killed.
Chapter: Ashvamedhika Parva Section 59

• What Krishna said about Arjuna

Quote (KMG):

There are also Bhishma, and Drona, and this Karna, and Kripa, and Bhurisrava, and Somadatta, and Aswatthaman, and Jayadratha. All these together are incapable of fighting against Dhananjaya. Indeed, Arjuna is incapable of being vanquished in battle even by all the gods, Asuras, men, and Gandharvas. Do not set thy heart for battle.

Analysis: So if you believe that lord Krishna was god then you have to accept that Arjuna is the best warrior. He is indeed better than karna. No mortal can defeat him. Every contemporary of karna knew that Arjuna >>>>>>>>>>>> karna. The mouth goes to the bigger one.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05124.htm
Quote (BORI):

This entire army of kings assembled by you, with Bhishma, Drona, Karna, Kripa, Somadatta’s son Bhurishrava, Ashvatthama, Jayadratha—all of them are incapable of withstanding Dhananjaya. An angry Arjuna is incapable of being vanquished by the gods, the asuras, men and the gandharvas. Do not get fixated on battle. In this entire army of kings, is there a single man who can face Arjuna in the field of battle and return safely to his home? O bull among the Bharata lineage! What is the point of this destruction of men? Show me one man whose victory will amount to a victory for you. In Khandavaprastha, he defeated the gods, the gandharvas, the yakshas, the asuras and the serpents. Which man can fight with him? In the same way, a great wonder is heard about Virata’s city. A single one was enough to counter many. That was sufficient proof. Nevertheless, you wish to defeat in battle the invincible, unassailable and undecaying Jishnu, the brave Arjuna.

Analysis: He even asked them a rhetorical question on whether their is even one man who can face Arjuna. It is obvious that Krishna believed Arjuna to be superior to Karna.
Chapter: Udyoga Parva Section 122

• What Krishna said about Yudhishthir

Quote (KMG):

The king of the Madras, O monarch, endued with the prowess of a lion or an elephant, will career fearlessly in battle like the Destroyer himself in wrath amongst creatures at the time of the universal destruction. I do not behold a match for him in battle save thee, O tiger among men, that art possessed of prowess equal to that of a tiger. Save thee there is no other person in either heaven or the whole of this world, who, O son of Kuru's race, would be able to slay the ruler of the Madras while excited with wrath in battle. Day after day engaged in fight, he agitates thy troops. For this, slay Shalya in battle, like Maghavat slaying Samvara.

Analysis: We all know how Arjuna defeated Shalya on the 3rd day, 14th day, etc. And how abhimanyu defeated him on the 13th day. How Satyaki defeated Shalya. How even nakula & Sahadeva have defeated Shalya. So are all of them superior to karna as well as yudhishtir?
Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09007.htm
Quote (BORI):

Barring you, there is no other man in all of heaven or earth. O descendant of the Kuru lineage! In a battle, there is no one else who can kill the angry king of Madra.

Analysis: So i guess not even shiva, vishnu, indra, surya, hanumana, krishna himself, balarama, arjuna, karna, bhima could ever kill shalya then...... I think that this is not true.
Chapter: Shalya Parva Section 6

• What krishna said about Shalya
• He called Shalya invincible.

Quote (KMG):

Treated with honour by Dhritarashtra's son, that hero is invincible in battle. Upon the fall of the ruler of the Madras in battle, thou art certain to have victory.

Analysis: Maybe krishna did not know that nakul defeated shalya on the 11th day....

Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09007.htm

Quote (KMG):

Then Vasudeva, O monarch, said unto that king, "I know Artayani, O Bharata, truly. Endued with prowess and great energy, he is highly illustrious. He is accomplished, conversant with all the modes of warfare, and possessed of great lightness of hand. I think that the ruler of the Madras is in battle equal to Bhishma or Drona or Karna, or perhaps, superior to them. I do not, O ruler of men, even upon reflection, find the warrior who may be a match for Shalya while engaged in fight. In battle, he is superior in might to Shikhandi and Arjuna and Bhima and Satyaki and Dhrishtadyumna, O Bharata.

Analysis: So if you believe Krishna is god should you consider Shalya the greatest warrior?
Source: http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m09/m09007.htm
Quote (BORI):

In an encounter, he is like Bhishma, Drona and Karna. The king of Madra may even be superior to them. That is my view. O descendant of the Bharata lineage! O lord of men! On thinking about it, I cannot find a warrior on your side who is his equal.

Analysis: Being like bhisma, drona, karna etc is not great because these are warriors who have always lost numerous times but are only glorified because they recieved education/training from Parasurama.
Chapter: Shalya Parva Section 6
Krishna believed it is ok to lie sometimes.
Quote (KMG):

I will now tell thee, O son of Pandu, this mystery connected with morality, this mystery that was declared by Bhishma, by the righteous Yudhishthira, by Vidura otherwise called Kshatri, and by Kunti, of great celebrity. I will tell thee that mystery in all its details. Listen to it, O Dhananjaya! One who speaks truth is righteous. There is nothing higher than truth. Behold, however, truth as practised is exceedingly difficult to be understood as regards its essential attributes. Truth may be unutterable, and even falsehood may be utterable where falsehood would become truth and truth would become falsehood. In a situation of peril to life and in marriage, falsehood becomes utterable. In a situation involving the loss of one's entire property, falsehood becomes utterable. On an occasion of marriage, or of enjoying a woman, or when life is in danger, or when one's entire property is about to be taken away, or for the sake of a Brahmana, falsehood may be uttered. These five kinds of falsehood have been declared to be sinless. On these occasions falsehood would become truth and truth would become falsehood. He is a fool that practises truth without knowing the difference between truth and falsehood.

Analysis: But karna fans seem to skip this narrative and not even read over it. They will just continue to ignore the faults in their arguments.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08069.htm
Quote (BORI):

The course of dharma needs to be reflected about. It is subtle and difficult to follow. O bull among the Bharata lineage! I will tell you about the mysteries of dharma. Bhishma told you about this and so did Yudhishthira, who knows about dharma, kshatta Vidura and the illustrious Kunti. O Dhananjaya! I will tell you about the details. Listen. One who speaks the truth is virtuous. There is nothing superior to truth. However, it is extremely difficult to understand how one should base oneself on truth. Sometimes, truth should not be spoken. And sometimes, a lie should be spoken. When all one’s possessions are being robbed, one should utter a lie. One should also utter a lie when one’s life is in danger, or at the time of a marriage. Those are the times when falsehood becomes truth and truth becomes falsehood. A person who is always based on truth is but a child. A person who can differentiate between truth and falsehood can alone follow dharma.

Analysis: Are we to believe that a person with such beleifs would never lie?
Chapter: Karna Parva Section 49
Quote (KMG):

'O great king, thou art a worthy possessor of all the qualities essential for the performance of the Rajasuya sacrifice. Thou knowest everything, O Bharata. I shall, however, still tell thee something. Those persons in the world that now go by the name of Kshatriyas are inferior (in everything) to those Kshatriyas that Rama, the son of Jamadagnya, exterminated.'

Analysis: If the Kshatriyas during Parshuram’s time were superior than how come Bhishma defeated Parshuram. Parshuram did kill all those Kshatriyas, so should not the Kshatriya’s during Parshuram’s time be inferior? He also believed that Yudhishthira was worthy of performing the Rajasuya sacrifice. And how can he be worthy of it when it's his brothers that did all the work?
Source:  http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02014.htm
Quote (BORI):

Because of all your qualities, you are capable of performing rajasuya. O descendant of the Bharata lineage! Though you know everything, I shall tell you something. Those who are known as kshatriyas in this world are remnants from kshatriyas who were exterminated by Jamadagni Rama.8

Analysis: Nothing much was changed. Now instead of kshatriyas being inferior krishna says that kshatriyas of mahabharata are descended from the ones that Rama killed. But krishna still lied when he said Yudhishthira deserves to perform tha rajasuya.
Chapter: Mantra Parva Section 13
He even said that Drona entered the war with just 9 Aukshounis on the 11th day:

The supreme of brahmanas was surrounded by the nine akshouhinis that were left. He prided himself in battle and was protected by Kripa, Vrisha255 and the others.

Source: Ashvamedhika Parva Section 59
But if we read the Mahabharata properly then you can see that the Kauravas still had at-least 14 Aukshounis left on the 14th day.
Screenshot:

Who would know more about how many troops are left in the Kourava army? Duryodhana? Or Krishna?

Misconception #74 "karna did not accept bhima's wrestling challenge on the 14th day because wrestling matches were done to death"
Refute:
Another lie, and another fake story. The reality is that karna did not accept the challenge because he was mentally scared. Let's talk about some other wrestling matches though.
Arjuna vs Shiva
This was not done to the death, they both wrestled and then left without killing eachother.
Karna himself vs Jarasandha
They wrestled and what happened? After karna beat him they choose to become friends and karna got a portion of land.
Bhima vs Sudharman (not the fake son of karna but a king of dasarnas who was stronger than karna)
Quote:

That exalted one then subjugated the Dasarnas. There in the country of the Dasarnas, the king called Sudharman with his bare p. 60 arms fought a fierce battle with Bhimasena. And Bhimasena, beholding that feat of the illustrious king, appointed the mighty Sudharman as the first in command of his forces.

Analysis: Bhima defeated him and appointed him as his commnader. They became allies. Again no death.
Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02028.htm
Misconception #75 "the favorite disciple of Parshuram was Karna"
Refute: no it wasn't, the favorite disciple was Bhisma:

I was thinking of him whom Ganga conceived and brought forth according to ordinary human laws and whom Vasishtha took as a pupil. I was thinking of that hero of mighty energy and great intelligence who possesses a knowledge of all the celestial weapons as also of the four Vedas with all their branches.I was thinking of him, O son of Pandu, who is the favourite disciple of Rama, the son of Jamadagni, and who is the receptacle of the sciences.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a046.htm
Misconception #76 "Karna was a Daanveer"
Refute:
1. The word/term “Daanveer” is not mentioned in Mahabharata, its a fake name created by TV shows.
2. Karna would only donate to men of the Brahmin caste.
3 Karna gave Kunti things that she never asked for, she asked him to side with his brother Arjuna but Karna said no and instead gave what Kunti never asked for. Basically refusing.
4. Karna did not donate his kavacha or kundalas to Indra, he told Indra he will never give it to him if Indra does not give him the dart, it was a demand by karna that he gets the dart first. So this is a trade.
5. Karna only donated for a very small portion of his life. For most of his life he never gave a single thing to someone/anyone.
6. Karna donated material that was not useful to him had little to no importance, its like a billionaire is donating one hundred dollars, those dollars were useless to him anyways as he has a huge fortune. The kavacha was of no use to karna so he traded it for a useful weapon that comes in handy.
If you are giving with the intention/desire of obtaining profit then it is not a true donation. Their are several people that Karna is still indebted to by the way like Radha, Adhiratha, Duryodhana, even others sons of Adhiratha (karna’s younger foster brothers) etc, they gave to karna but karna never gave back to them.

Other Kshatriya's were daanveer's "Similarly, a Kshatriya should protect the people in accordance with the injunctions of the law, diligently practise the virtue of charity, offer sacrifices, study the whole Veda, take a wife, and lead a virtuous householder's life."
https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05029.htm
Point; as a suta's son Karna can never be a doner, as only Kshatriyas can do that, Yudhishthir, Arjun, Suyodhan were doners karna was not.

Misconception #77 "Arjuna never donated"
Debunk:
Arjuna donated to brahmins:
"Whatever regions of sacred waters and whatever other holy palaces there were in Vanga and Kalinga, Arjuna visited all of them. Seeing them all and performing proper ceremonies, he gave away much wealth. Then, O Bharata, all those Brahmanas following the p. 421 son of Pandu, bade him farewell at the gate of the kingdom of Kalinga and desisted from proceeding with him any further."
https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01218.htm

Misconception #77 "Dhrishtadyumna was a commander and so was Karna but Arjuna never was a commander"
Debunk: Actually the leader of their army was Arjuna not Dhrishtadyumn:
"above them all was placed in command of all the troops that Dhrishtadyumna who had sprung from the blazing (sacrificial) fire for the destruction of Drona. And Dhananjaya, of curly hair, was made the leader of all those high-souled leaders."
Source: https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05158.htm

Misconception #78 "Karna's curse by Parashuram made him lose"

Debunk: stop barking like a namard kutta
here are the words of parashuram: "Since thou hast, from avarice of weapons, behaved here with falsehood, therefore,O wretch, this Brahma weapon shalt not dwell in thy remembrance1. Since thou art not a Brahmana, truly this Brahma weapon shall not, up to the time of thy death, dwell in thee when thou shalt be engaged with a warrior equal to thyself!”
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a003.htm after this he says "no kshatriya will be thy equal in battle" meaning people will be superior and others will be inferior but no one will be equal to karna, he has protected karna from this curse

If you notice the words of Parasurama above, he has indirectly given Karna a blessing to protect him from the curse. As he states that no Kshatriya will be Karna’s equal, the curse only affects Karna if he faces a warrior equal to himself right? But now no warrior can be an equal to Karna, everyone will be either superior to Karna or inferior to Karna. So thus his curse is nullified completely now.

karna also used brahmastra three times on the 17th day

1. "Thus assailed on all sides by the foremost of Pandava warriors, Karna invoked into existence the brahmastra and filled all the points of the compass with arrows." https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08049.htm

2. "Steadying himself by a powerful effort he invoked the brahmastra." https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08090.htm 

3. "Karna, invoking the brahmastra, showered his shafts upon Dhananjaya and once more made an effort to extricate his chariot" https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m08/m08091.htm

Misconception #79 "Karnas curse by a brahmin made him lose"
Debunk:
Karna was never smart enough to handle these curses. He was a idiot and a retard all he had to do was fight from foot on the floor as an infantry warrior, or fight like a mongol/hun on the back of a horse (steed) but the dumbass failed to do that.
Karna could have switched chariots or rode the same chariot with another warrior (he was on the chariot of Vrishasen his son, and Ashwathama on the 14th day) but he wasnt smart enough on the 17th day.

Misconception #80 "karna was wounded in the war with drupad he did not lose because it is mentioned only kauravas retreated"

Refute - dear namards and napunsaks who spread fake copypasted theories created by inbred eunuchs to defend the izzat of a weak warrior like karna (who was inferior to maya dolas as maya was brave enough to not run away despite leading seven warriors against 100 police officers) the meaning of the word "smote" is clearly wounded/injured, and if you do not retaliate in a battle/war then that means the last person to attack you won or any one who attacked you and got away with it won, what was karna doing? he saw the pandavs defeating drupad so all namard karna did was sit back and watch like a helpless eunuch as his rival did what he failed to do karna saw 2 warriors superior to him (drupad, arjun etc), and we can still say karn ran like a napunsak because karna is a part of the kaurav team

Quote: "Drupada with his arrows smote Duryodhana and Vikarna and even the mighty Karna and many other heroic princes and numberless warriors, and slaked their thirst for battle"

link; https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01141.htm

Commentary: "the mighty karna" was radha's son raised by Adhirath and a child of a 2nd napunsak named "Suryadev" a student of parashuram he had help of 101 sons of Dhritarashtra (even Yuyutsu) so accept that Drupad defeated karna, or maybe it was Satyajit that defeated karna or another person? Who really cares because at the end of the day the conclusion was karna's loss. And no one mentions it later either because of the digvijay of karn, or the fact that this was karna's first war so he lacked experience and his peers dont hold it against him (peers as in; "Kripa" "Shalya" "Ashwathama" "Drona" "Bhishma" "Suyodhana")
________________________
Anyways at the end of the day. Karna was like that jackal/politician who would in times of crisis benefit at other peoples expense by using his intelligence to fool them. People like Karna are the reason why a country like India is not a golden bird anymore. Why India was enslaved by the British. Because of people like karna and his fans. They will always hold india back. And more importantly they will also hold anyone who supports the truth back. Karna never gets respect in foreign countries like Arjuna does.